Wait a second, wasn’t I just talking about AMC’s oddities? The Marlin managed to take the popular fastback body style to such an extreme that buyers balked. Also in the category of “trying too hard”, AMC advertised its big fastback as man-sized, fine for swinging threesomes, and more benignly, the “family fastback”. Let’s forget all that for one second: I’ve always liked this car. It’s big, no question, but it’s weird in an innocuous way. Nothing is too overboard: the front end could be almost any AMC, the interior, ditto, and the rear end is… distinguishing? The Marlin was launched in 1965 after a successful debut of AMC’s Tarpon concept car. But the Tarpon was built on a compact chassis. When management gave the green light to the production version, there was a proviso: the car had to seat six. The design team moved it to the mid-sized Rambler Classic platform – and then struggled to harmonize the styling. This first-year survivor is for sale here on craigslist for $19,000. Reel it in from Palm Springs, California. Thanks, T.J., for the tip!
Here’s another problem with the Marlin. And this Marlin in particular. AMC was pining for a seat at the muscle car table, but the AMX – its first entry – was a few years out. The Marlin came standard with a 232 cu. in. in-line six, good for only 155 hp. Several V8s were available as well, but as the landscape evolved, muscle cars from other makers were rapidly outperforming AMC’s little V8s. This car sports a three-speed automatic and only 38,580 miles, according to its 47-year owner. We can probably trust the mileage claim.
While AMC may have compromised the Marlin’s exterior styling, the interior was nothing short of luxurious, with a machine-turned dash insert, comfortable individual seats, chrome interior trim, carpet everywhere, and color-keyed elements. We have to give this an A+ for features and condition. Impressive!
The roof line looks too long from this perspective, though I do like the Marlin’s tail end. Turns out Roy Abernethy, calling the shots at AMC when the Marlin was conceived, was a tall guy. He wanted the car to have plenty of headroom. Consequently, the car is unbalanced front-to-back, with a short hood and long rear. In 1967, this changed: the car was married up with the Ambassador platform, and redrawn to better proportions. But by then, the Charger was stealing huge hunks of market share in the muscle car market, and the Mustang was stealing everyone else’s market share. Marlin sales slid commensurately. The model was eliminated in 1967 with fewer than 20,000 total sold. This car has a few strong points, but that six-cylinder and the condition of the paint might warrant a slight discount. What do you think?
You know, I think I’ve seen more Marlins at this site, than altogether growing up in Milwaukee. I remember, and bring this up on every Marlin post, as total car kids, we, in Beer City were embarrassed to even talk about the Marlin. When you have a car company that made their money on the mundane, the Marlin was just too far out there, even though, the public was unaware, the fastback was the next big thing. It was still a Rambler. I still agree with experts, if it only had a hatchback. All these early fastbacks suffered the same thing, the trunk opening was too small. AMC made one of the 1st hatchbacks, the Hornet and Sportabout, and moderately successful, and soon everybody had a hatchback.
I suppose there is some merit in coming from a city that made unusual cars. At the time, the Marlin was the joke of the automotive world, but who’s laughing now, eh? They were great cars if one could only find the hood release,, :) (separate story)
It’s worth noting that in 1965 it was the “Rambler Marlin” but became the “AMC Marlin” in 1966. A way, I suppose, to distance the car from its Rambler roots.
Just saw this one on Oct. 1 written up by Russ and it was $3k less.
I stopped reading at “Swinging threesomes”
The lead photo angle displays the awkwardness that made this fastback look so dorky. The side view appears to be more humpback, than fastback. Later models were an improvement, but you only get one chance to make a first impression!
Back in 1965, I remember my 14-year old self accompanying my parents to Valiton Rambler (in Toledo) to look at replacing their 1962 Classic. I begged and pleaded for the Marlin, but, of course, we wound up with a gold (with black roof) Classic 550 4dr, 6cyl stick.
And then, there was the time in 1976, on an extended California trip that I found a 65 Marlin at a junkyard in Fontana. Rust-free (in California? Naturally!), running and DRIVEABLE (!!!), factory AC and power windows for the princely sum of $250. I’ve kicked myself ever since for not trying to figure out some way to get it back to Ohio. Didn’t trust a long distance drive in it, and meanwhile I was already driving a car with a U-Haul behind it moving a friend’s mother (and her furniture) back to Ohio. Wasn’t any way I could clone myself to drive 2 cars, and college students don’t really have budgets for transport trucks. One of numerous automotive regrets over the years.
Nice condition in and out, I want one will get one but not this one too pricey and it has a 6,,under powered,,I had a Matador 2 door that had the 6,,still too big of a care for that 6.
I volunteered at a car auction back in “98 saw many cars go on the block but the one that caught my attention was a beautiful ’65 Marlin with a black roof, +red body and interior, chrome was perfect. No takers.
This is a great survivor but the 232 6 is a huge negative.
IF, I had this car, I would not want to change it drastically. BUT, the 232 would have to go. (Good engine for an American or Gremlin) I would source a 4.0 that would get a .060 over bore and install a crankshaft and rods from a 258 6cyl. Giving me a 4.9 litre engine. Add some mild cam,intake and exhaust mods. And THEN, it would be a good driver. Maybe upgrade the brakes, use wider wheels but keep the original wheel covers and some good performance shocks. But keep it stock looking.
First thing would be engine replacement.
So if he wants to sell he needs to get it around 14K. A good 5K 4 a v8 transplant and THEN it’s worth 19K
I would not even take it for 10K with this engine. Its way too pricy actually and I doubt that anyone will buy the car actually.
If this has been on the American chassis, with all the engine options. They would have had a Mustang fighter, AND it would have looked cool! Can you imagine that AND had come up with a hatch back too? It would have really been a game changer!
They should have produced the Tarpon, it would have sold rings around the Marlin.
Yes, I agree. The American nose, the lower roofline and smaller size would have been a hit! IMHO.
Some angles do tend to just not jell right but I do like the Marlin and the interiors really were pretty nice, but I’d take a 67′ Charger with a 440ci over it any day.
Pull the engine and put in a …..Studebaker R2,,thats different,,not a 350 chev