Excellent write-up! Thank You!
Its good to have an Historian among us.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Watson <wwatson@xxxxxxxxx>
To: L-FORWARDLOOK@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <L-FORWARDLOOK@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tuesday, October 12, 1999 1:20 AM
Subject: Re: [FWDLK] Rape of AMC?
>Actually, virtually all of the firms in American Motors history had
>some earlier connection with Chrysler :
>
>NASH : Charles Nash was Walter P. Chrysler's boss at Buick. When
>Chrysler retired from active management at Chrysler in 1936,
>Charlie Nash decided to do likewise at his firm. It was Walter P.'s
>idea to bring aboard George Mason as Charlie's successor (and
>as a result, merge with Kelvinator, which Mason was heading at
>the time).
>
>HUDSON : The founders of the Hudson firm (Roy D. Chapin (Sr),
>Roscoe Jackson, Harry E. Coffin, F.O.Bezner, had an idea to
>produce a car. They sold the idea to E.R. Thomas (of Thomas-
>Flyer fame) and between the group of them Thomas-Detroit
>was established. But sales were sluggish and Hugh Chalmers
>was brought aboard. They original group designed a smaller,
>lighter car of 20hp. Neither Thomas nor Chalmers was willing
>to invest money into this venture. Thus J.L. Hudson, Jackson's
>wife's uncle, put up the money. A new factory was built on
>Jefferson Avenue, across the street from the Chalmers factory
>(the one imploded to make way for the Jeep Grand Cherokee)
>At this point, the three firms separated - Thomas retreated to
>Buffalo; the Thomas-Detroit becoming Chalmers which went on
>to become part of Maxwell, then Chrysler; and Hudson to
>merge with Nash to make American Motors.
>
>WILLYS / WILLYS-OVERLAND : The idea of the Jeep was pushed
>ahead by one Joseph Washington Frazer, who had become
>president in 1938, after leaving his position as sales manager
>for Chrysler Corporation. The "Plymouth" name was Frazer's idea -
>named after the binder twine and not the trans-Atlantic voyage.
>Fraser left Willy-Overland in 1944 to take over Graham-Paige
>and later was involved in Kaiser-Frazer. Willys-Overland
>was taken over by the Kaisers in 1953, and sold to AMC in 1969.
>J.W. Frazer had been with Chrysler since 1923, being the hand
>behind the "New Good Maxwell", and with General Motors
>(1919-1923) and starting out at Packard in 1912.
>
>Walter P. was also involved in Willys-Overland in 1920-1921,
>being brought aboard by the banks that were owed millions
>due to sluggish sales of Willys-Overland products and over-
>expansion on the part of Willys-Overland. Chrysler and the
>three musketeers (Owens, Skelton and Breer) designed a new
>six-cylinder car, the Chrysler, to be built by the Willys Corporation
>in its Elizabeth, New Jersey, plant. But, the car and plant were
>sold at auction to one William C. Durant, who used the plant
>for his "Star" car, and the car design for the "Flint". If you have
>wondered why the 1924 Chrysler was a Model B, and whatever
>happened to the Chrysler Model A, now you know.
>
>GRAHAM BROTHERS / GRAHAM-PAIGE / GRAHAM : The 3 Graham
>Brothers began making trucks after World War I. By the early
>1920's they used Dodge Brothers mechanicals exclusively, and
>their trucks were sold through Dodge Brothers dealers. By 1926
>the Graham Brothers firm was owned by Dodge Brothers and the
>3 brothers were part of Dodge Brothers management. In 1927
>they left Dodge Brothers and purchased Paige-Detroit Motors.
>An attempt to produce a line of commercial vehicles in 1930-1931
>called the Paige was challenged by Chrysler Corporation,
>claiming the brothers had agreed not to market commercial
>vehicles after leaving Dodge Brothers.
>The Grahams, by the way, had an earlier claim to fame. They
>perfected a way of blowing glass bottles to produce a strong
>crown - permitting the development of bottle caps. Their
>firm is now the "Owens" in Libby-Owens-Ford.
>The Graham family sold their interest in Graham-Paige Motors to
>Joseph Washington Frazer, who had just left Willys-Overland.
>The 1947 Kaiser and Frazer designs were derived from a Graham-
>Paige design for a post-war car. Graham-Paige pulled out
>of the car business altogether in 1947.
>I have often wondered why Frazer left Chrysler. He left just
>after Chrysler retired and was replaced by K.T.Keller. Did Frazer
>feel he had no future at Chrysler? Was there disagreement between
>Keller and Fraser? Given the conservatism of Keller and the
>opposite for Frazer (having given us the Willys Americar, the Willys
>Jeep and the Kaiser and Frazer), this could have some merit.
>
>KAISER / FRAZER : These were based on a car being pushed by
>J.W. Frazer of Graham-Paige at the end of World War II. When
>the 1949 models were being planned, the Kaisers wanted to
>produce more cars than 1948. J.W. came back with that as K-F
>would be selling a three-year old design against new or one-year
>old competitors. He believed they could sell 70,000 cars and make
>a small profit. The Kaisers wanted to build 200,000 cars, which
>Frazer believed would result in a $36 million loss. Frazer was
>on his way out, with the assistance of the Kaisers. The results
>for 1949? 58,000 cars built and a $32 million loss.
>(Wonder what Chrysler Corporation would have been like if Frazer
>took over in 1936 and not Keller. Bet Chrysler would never have
>slipped below Ford during the 1950's. )
>
>So, Chrysler had quite an involvement with American Motors
>and the firms that had combined under its banner.
>
>As for AMC being acquired just for the Jeep, not really. In 1987
>all AMC had was the AMC Eagle, the Renault Alliance, the Jeep
>and a new car (Renault Premier) in a new, state-of-the-art, plant
>in Bramalea, Ontario. The Renault Premier would become the
>Eagle Premier and formed the basis for its successor, the LH
>line of vehicles. (As for the other Canadian plant, in Brampton,
>it is now Wal-Mart's Canadian warehouse.)
>
>Considering the rest of the AMC line-up, only the Jeep was viable.
>The AMC Eagle was dead, with only 2,017 produced from July 1987
>to December 1987. The Renault Alliance had gained such a
>reputation for poor reliability and under-powered gutlessness
>that there was nothing Chrysler could have done to save it.
>
>None of the above cars were Chrysler products, and Chrysler,
>as far as I can see, is not claiming that they were. Chrysler is,
>however, claiming they are part of the Chrysler heritage,
>which they are. They may not have had any influence on today's
>Chrysler Concorde, but then neither does a 1961 Dodge Polara.
>
>Bill W
>
|
|
Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network