As the name suggests, the Renault Alliance was a partnership between AMC and, at the time, its majority partner, Renault. They were only made for a handful of model years and are rarely seen today, and more than a few people think that they’re a future collectible. This 1985 Renault Alliance convertible can be found listed here as a Barn Finds Classified. It’s located in Canton, Ohio, and the seller is asking $2,995.
I know that quite a few Barn Finds readers have owned either an Alliance or Encore, another of the partnership’s offspring models, and I hope that you’ll tell us about your experiences with them. A few years ago, I had a 1987 Renault GTA, which I have mentioned in the past, and it was an outstanding car. It was totally trouble-free and fun to drive, and I thought it just plain looked cool. I never should have sold that car.
The Alliance was made from mid-1982, for the 1983 model year, until mid-1987 for the 1987 model year. After that, production at the Kenosha, Wisconsin plant ceased and the Alliance was no more. The merged company reportedly sold 35,000 Alliance cars in its final half-year of production in 1987. This example is in great condition, according to the seller, who says that there is little to no rust. They do say that the passenger-side convertible top needs a few repairs.
The interior appears to be in nice condition and these are really comfortable little cars, believe it or not. The convertible model was new for the 1985 model year, and it was reportedly AMC’s first convertible body style since the 1968 Rebel. The firm, American Sunroof Company (ASC), partnered with AMC to make the convertibles.
Here is another photo of the incredibly perfect-looking interior, including a photo of the backseat, in place of what would normally be a photo of the engine. The seller doesn’t include an engine photo, sadly, but it has a Renault 1.7-liter inline-four which would have had 77 horsepower and 96 lb-ft of torque when new. They say that the 5-speed manual transmission doesn’t shift into reverse so that’ll have to be figured out. I’m assuming that it’s related to the piece on the shifter that you have to pull up on to shift it into reverse, sometimes that goes haywire, but I’m guessing that it’s fixable. Have any of you owned an Alliance?
What kind of dystopian hellscape are we in for if these become collectible??
Just wait until you see the supportive comments…
Despite their short run and relative rarity when new it seems like most surviving Alliances are convertibles.
Bought a 1986 Coupe DL around 1993 to serve as a winter beater. Same red, but grey interior. Mine had the larger 1.7 too, but with a well-adapted automatic. Felt like a luxury car next to the Mazda GLC it replaced. Wobbly structure, brittle trim bits and two years in I sold it when the auto started to slip a bit.
Had a 1985 model
Motor Trend car of year. I didn’t the convertible cameout until ’87. The Encore was the hatchback form. How did Buick aquire that name?
I bought a leftover 1985 Encore S with 1.7L SOHC engine, A/T & A/C as a 2nd car in 1986. It was a reliable, comfortable hatchback with decent performance. Served me well for 10 years. Sold it in 1996. No regrets.
I looked at a new 1983 alliance at the AMC dealer. They asked me to take a test drive. These have the 1 4 eng. I drove it about 1/4 mile and brought it back. Way to slow,and trim parts were literally falling off the car. A terrible car
Had a Encore with the 1.4, got 45mpg on the hwy. some of the best seats in any I have ever owned, drove the wheels off it.
Got to love the authors banner headline, “Franco-American”,,if you are like me, and I’m sure Scotty too as a kid, you were forced to eat that crap when mom was working and dad could barely open a can.. I always found it odd, “Franco-American” sold primarily spaghetti products, Italian, no? Marketing at its finest.
When the author sold his Alliance, I just knew there would be remorse, they were good, not great cars. I think most sales were “pity” sales, as stout AMC buyers with worn out Matadors, buying whatever the company put out, and generally, not many bought another. My brother had a 2 door hardtop, not a bad car, I found it unusual it has an “oil LEVEL” gauge, hadn’t seen that since a 1927 Packard, and with proper maintenance, no worse than any other econobox. I think the only way anyone kept one, was for the convertible.
A sad end to a once mighty automaker, so much so, I read, disgruntled workers, knew the end was near and sabotaged these cars, leaving gaskets out, putting washers inside doors to create rattles, trust me, it was not a happy time, I was there.
During its heyday Kenosha was a great town with happy well paid workers. The recent troubles there never would have happened if certain choices by just a few, would have been made differently. Sadly, this is the story of so much of the once great Midwest. Howard, I bet you feel the same.
Well, kind of, those workers cut their own throats, didn’t see many Chrysler mini-vans in Kenosha however, where the cry was “Real Estate courtesy of Lee Iococca”,,When Chrysler took over, ( 1987) people had a renewed ray of hope, that didn’t last long. It was well known, all Chrysler wanted was the Jeep, nothing else. Kenosha made the M series Plymouth for a short time, but the last thing made in Kenosha was the 4.0 Jeep motor. I hauled some of the last motors out of Kenosha, in an overseas container, bound for some foreign country. To show what was going on at the end, Chrysler had/has a plant in Mexico, building the same motors Kenosha was making, and paying those workers $7.50/ hr. while Kenosha workers were making, with benefits, almost $30/hr. Chrysler begged the union to make some changes, but they held fast, and almost 5,500 workers lost their jobs.
Kenosha has turned itself around, Amazon being the biggest thing, but going to Kenosha today, there isn’t one shred of reminder of AMC.
Howard. I was speaking of the quality of life a union job once provided, and the mental stability it provided that made for a calmer place to live. Yes, the union could have gave in a little, but Chrysler was making a fortune even at what they were paying, was it fair for the union to take a pay cut so they could make even more? As far as profits go, when is it enough, especially when it turns union towns into crime ridden dystopian domains? In Europe, by law, companies are required to have worker representatives on corporate boards so the workers get a fair shake. They also understand when the company is in trouble and then have to give a little, but when the company is flush with cash yet still wants to cut workers benefits so they can make even more, they can smell the fart in the room and they know who passed it. I have never understood the logic of why an American worker who has much greater living costs, needs to compete with a foreign worker who has a much cheaper living cost. Makes no sense unless you are a stock holder. Plus, do you see significantly lower costs at the dealership? Maybe with some things like TVs, but cars and trucks? I see record profits, stock buy backs, and record setting executive pay. I also see crime ridden streets in once great American cities. There needs to be a compromise here.
Had an Encore. I lived in Kenosha at the time, bought it from a guy that worked in the plant where they built them. Body was nice, seemed like they didn’t rust as fast as most cars do here. Interior nice too. Cute little car. Had the 1.7 engine and auto trans.
Mechanically a mess. Some of the things I ran into:
On the 1.7 there is an idler pully on the timing belt that gets no oil so the bearing fails. Timing belt breaks and there is limited valve clearance so it wipes out the valves. Aluminum head tends to crack when this happens.
CV joints fail early and often. The guy I bought it from said he lubed the rubber boots to keep them from cracking because once they cracked the joint would fail.
There was a recall because a heater part in the interior console was prone to fail and spray hot anti-freeze on the passengers.
I sold it to a buddy and he told me he had to replace the starter and it was an ordeal.
Hey Scotty! I spent a weekend driving one of these years ago, invited by the owner as the wheel-man for a weekend trip. While the lack of power was perceptible at virtually all times, it got great mileage and rode and cornered fine. The strangest thing was the rubbery shifter. In any gear you could grab it and thrash it all around, but low and behold if you put in the clutch and wobbled it in the direction of what you hoped would be the desired gear, it would go in. Evidently it was connected to the transmission only by rubber bands. Because of its utilitarian and excitement-free behavior, our circle of friends called it “The Appliance.” Thanks for the memories and another great write-up.
Yes, I owned an Alliance- worst car ever! By 50,000 miles, the engine was replaced three times! Yep, three times. The engine design was (IMHO) defective and was probably the reason for Renault’s retreat from America for the second time- that and their refusal to provide decent customer satisfaction. I was fortunate enough to unload it and purchase a Honda Accord in 1986. That was one of the best cars I ever owned!
Radwood worthy conversation piece for short money. Not a bad way for someone to get into that scene if that’s something they’re looking to do.
”Despite their short run and relative rarity when new it seems like most surviving Alliances are convertibles.”
Because all the sedan’s roofs rusted off.
I miss AMC, but not this POS!
Many years ago I worked with a man, who was freshly divorced, embittered and feeling hopeless. It turned out that he had been newly married only a few years earlier when his father-in-law set him up in business with a fleet of Alliances as rental cars. Needless to say, the whole enterprise folded rather quickly and when the blame game began he was single again. He blamed the poor build quality and constant breakdowns in his fleet for his sad state!
A French car,built by Americans,in Wisconsin –
what could go wrong?
Sacre’ bleu!
AMC needed cash and sold new AMC shares to Renault giving then 49% ownership. More than enough to control but not a majority. I believe at the time, the AMC Jeep/ AM General trucks sold to the federal Govt had to be bought from an American company so Renault’s limit was 49%. AMC’s straight 6 cylinder and V-8s were modern and cast iron and ran forever. The Renaults had the aluminum French built front-wheel drive powertrains that never had a good reputation. So, in 1987 when Chrysler bought AMC-Jeep the assets they wanted were Jeep and the new high-tech robotic factory that AMC built in Canada with the Renault proceeds. AMC stockholders did ok with Chrysler stock that then became Daimler-Mercedes stock when Daimler bought Chrysler-Dodge-Ram-Jeep.
IIRC, Renault increased their ownership to 90 percent about 1982.
That’s why AM General had to be sold. At the time, they had the HMMV contract, as well as more-conventional military trucks. And the Postal vehicle.
All of these were contracts that were closed to foreign-owned manufacturers. So either the Renault deal would be undone (and AMC bankrupted) or AM General sold, or the contracts cancelled.
AM General was sold to LTV Corporation in 1984.
But by the time Chrysler got interested, Renault was ready to sell or close the company. The head of Renault was assassinated by political radicals, as repayment for layoffs in Renault plants while spending money on AMC. His replacement just wanted out of AMC, and Lee Iacocca was right there with money.
American Motors Canada was a separate subsidy and not fully owned by Renault, although operated as an integral division. And there was still a small minority of shares of AMC held not by Renault. Those were the ones who were converted to Chrysler stock.
Chrysler bought all AMC stock trading it for Chrysler stock, so really Chrysler put up little or no money for AMC-Jeep. AMC stockholders did ok, it was not a fire sale. Those who owned AMC stock in 1987 got Chrysler stock that then became Mercedes Daimler Benz stock when Chrysler got bought out. I still have my Mercedes stock that was AMC stock in 1987, and it pays a dividend. My understanding was that AMC sold their AM General division for cash right after AM General won the contract for their HumVee vehicle and the sale was to get cash, not because AMC was no longer an American Company. AMC did not have production facilities to build hundreds of thousands of HumVees so the value of the AM General went from zero to $$$ with the HumVee contract and AMC cashed out AM General to keep the rest of AMC-Jeep afloat.
A buddy of mine, sadly gone too soon, was about 6′ 4″ and 250# back in the day. He bought one of these and he did sort of fit into it. I’m not sure why he chose this car.
Reverse eventually went out on the tranny and he was big and strong enough that he would just open the door and push with his left foot to back up. That was “reverse”.
We called it the “Flintstone-mobile”. Good times.
I remember these cars well on business trips to AZ. Avis had a bunch of these in their rental fleet c. 1986 in Phoenix. I tried to avoid them when offered, but sometimes that was all they had.
I used to drive up to Flagstaff and the long climbs up I-17 brought these cars to their knees. I would try to get a running start and bury the pedal up against the firewall, with the engine screaming for mercy. The climbs eventually caught up and there went the momentum. I remember being passed a time or two by a semi. Not fun times.
I’ve had a ’85 Convertible now for 20 years. Very nice smooth riding car with power windows in the front . Its 1700 cc. engine operates great with the 5 speed with easy shifting.
It has an interference engine. Recommend changing the timing belt ( American Made) every 3 years or 30K miles. Convertibles are rarely built so I believe there will be more collectable in years to come.
Bought this from a guy who was keeping his Yugo and selling this. Mine was white. It was a powerful 1.4 liter 4 speed. Kind of junky, but it was fairly reliable. This was my go-to-work car since my drive was 50 miles one way. 40 mpg on the highway. Sold to a guy at work when I thought it was worn out. He drove it another 3 years.
Magnifique ? 🇫🇷/🇺🇸
It’s fascinating…how, at the same time, the Renault Alliance was crafted for assembly in Kenosha…and came out a complete bucket of crap…the same Renault taskmasters were overseeing the preparation of the XJ, one of the all-time legends of American automobile design, SUV or not.
Everywhere the Alliance was weak, the XJ was not. The only apparent shortfall with the XJ was, engine choices – and that was solved, a couple of years in, with the field-engineering of the long six, into the XJ’s engine bay.
Meantime, the Alliance was made cheap, without a thought that such an approach might also make it fragile. American buyers WANTED the car to succeed…judging by the way buyers flocked to it, the first year. It looked perfect. It checked all the boxes. The only thing it lacked was ANY sort of durability…the rage of buyers was such, it reached shoppers of a year later. In history, only a few times has there been such backlash – the Yugo’s market-meltdown was the only contemporary one.
Which comes to the question: Why was there a convertible Alliance? Obviously, because buyers for the car as it was, were drying up. It was either send cars off to American Sunroof for a third-party convertible setup…or address the fundamental problems of Renault, and hope buyers were convinced quickly enough to save the car and AMC.
And given the nature of the AMC-Renault “partnership,” that wasn’t going to happen. Overlords do NOT make mistakes.
So this was one more step towards AMC’s fate, a fire-sale to another master, and then, dismembering, and abandoning the primary product. The only remarkable outcome was that the Renault Premier, rebranded Eagle, was allowed to come to market.
In the mid 80s I worked for a Volvo dealer that also sold Alliances and Encores. The guys in the Service department hated to see these come in. It was always a big mess. I would take a Chevette over an Alliance.
I have owned 3 of these and still have my 87 convertible with 160,000 miles. Pretty much trouble free and going strong. These were no more weak or unreliable than any other American small car of that era.
Don’t abuse them and do the preventive maintenance and they will be kind to you in return. I know a man who drove a Yugo for years without problems, common sense is all it takes. Sure, they were not Toyota or Honda reliable, but they were cheaper.
BBS hubcaps…
I bought a new ’84 Alliance and loved it from the first day. It was the first brand-new car I’d ever owned. Mine had the smaller engine, so very poor power, but reliable because I did all my own frequent maintenance. It was also sure-footed in the snow and got incredible gas mileage. I kept it four years and traded it in on an ’85 Maxima SE. Talk about a change. LOL I still miss the Alliance and always wanted a convertible. I’m tempted, but no room for another old tiny convertible in my life. My GEO Metro will have to do for now.
I’ve owned three: an Alliance GTA convertible, an Encore 3 door hatch, and my current, an Encore 5 door hatch. All have been great cars for different reasons. The Alliance GTA convertible was the top of the line “halo” car with a close ration 5 speed and 2.0 liter motor. The car drove and handled incredibly well. The Encore 3 door had the 1.7 with a stick and was fun and drove well. The Encore 5 door is amazing. It’s got the 1.7 but with an automatic and working AC. Great car. I have a mechanic that I take the car to once or twice a year and he is excellent. These cars are very undervalued for their engineering and are sleepers on the classic car market.
I also owned three Alliances. They rode really well but had a few issues. In that era, most cars had issues. The cars were new, modern , economical and compared to the huge gas guzzlers on the road, I felt very good about myself. My first Alliance was a base two goor with a manual. That was my favorite one. The other two had air and an automatic. They were nice as well but the manual was much more fun. I wanted a two door with the nice interior with the cool seats and electric windows. The Limited only came as a four door but had the best seats. If I could find a nice two door coupe with electric windows, I would be interested.