Meh Car Monday: The Amazingly Dull Renault Alliance

Illustration for article titled Meh Car Monday: The Amazingly Dull Renault Alliance

French cars, love them or hate them, are very rarely boring. Renaults, even when they’re designed to be utilitarian or cheap, somehow manage to have a certain interesting flair: look at the Renault 4 or Dauphine or Twingo: all cheap, basic cars, all somehow charming in their own way. Not so with the Renault Alliance, the successful experiment to see if you could make a Renault really boring.

Advertisement

What makes the Renault Alliance even more fascin-meh-ting is the fact that the car has an interesting origin story. The cars started life in France as the Renault 9 (the hatchback version was the Renault 11, which was called the Encore here), and the only reason the Alliance version exists at all is because in the 1970s, America’s number four carmaker, AMC, was about to die.

Fig.1: Not Boring
Fig.1: Not Boring
Advertisement

AMC had only 2% of the U.S. car market, and when the economy declined in the late ‘70s, no banks were interested in helping out AMC. The government was game to co-sign loans for Chrysler, but, again, nobody really cared all that much—save for fanatical Pacer and Gremlin owners—if AMC bit the dust.

So, desperate, AMC reached out across the pond, and worked a deal with Renault to get a $90 million loan, and then exchanged what eventually would be a controlling share of ownership in AMC for the right to sell Renault models in America.

Illustration for article titled Meh Car Monday: The Amazingly Dull Renault Alliance

This actually seemed like a great idea: for Renault, it was a chance to finally crack the U.S. market. They had a good start in the ‘50s and ‘60s with the Dauphine, which for a while was selling as the number two import, right after the Volkswagen Beetle, but Renault never built a dealer network in the U.S. like VW did, which effectively killed them. AMC’s dealer network was a chance to make things right.

Advertisement

From AMC’s perspective, they got to, you know, stay alive, and they got access to small, fuel-efficient cars that they could not build, but people wanted.

Illustration for article titled Meh Car Monday: The Amazingly Dull Renault Alliance
Advertisement

They offered the Renault 5 as the LeCar, but even that was a bit too weird for most weird-phobic Americans. That may be why when they decided to “Americanize” the Renault 9, they went so all-out on the dullification front.

The car used the same 1.4-liter engine as the LeCar, making a limp 64 horsepower—later versions got 1.7-liter and then 2-liter engines that made up to 95 hp (in the more-fun GTA version), which helped a bit.

Advertisement

Still, the car itself was about as generic and bland an ‘80s FWD sedan could be. The Alliance’s styling was clean, crisp, hard-edged, and just about completely anonymous.

It competed against cars like the Toyota Corolla mostly by being slightly larger in some dimensions, like you can see in this ad with a very, very stunned yellow-sweater enthusiast:

Those looks of stunned amazement you see there are the only recorded case of anyone having that reaction to a Renault Alliance.

Advertisement

In ideal meh-car fashion, the Alliance wasn’t really all that terrible. Motor Trend even famously picked it as their Car of the Year, in what must have been a clandestine CIA-funded effort to lull Americans into a long, dull nap where they couldn’t cause any trouble:

The Alliance and the hatchback version, the Encore (which did at least have a sort-of-cool glass bubble rear hatch) were built in America, and were certainly priced competitively, at $5,595. A Honda Civic from that era would have been right under $6,000.

Advertisement

The problem was the meh-ness of the Alliance. It was a car that was just really difficult to actually give a shit about. Look, this ad’s biggest specific feature brag about the car has to do with the length of the wheelbase, and that the rear wheels are slightly more rearward:

Those effects are pretty fantastic, though. Were those all analog back in the day?

Advertisement

I mean, sure, I get that does make for a better ride, but that’s a tricky thing to get people excited about. When the AMC sales guy takes you by the arm and asks you to look, I mean really look at the position of those back wheels, that’s probably not going to get you reaching for your checkbook.

Really, the car was fairly decent, delivering good fuel economy and arguably handling better than cars like the Citation or anything AMC could have offered otherwise, but that’s just all part of why it’s such an ideal meh car: if it was really terrible, that’d be too interesting.

Advertisement

The combination of fierce adequacy, looks so boring your brain just substitutes a white box with the word CAR on it when you look directly at it, and a not-so-stellar reliability record meant that the Alliance wasn’t the runaway success AMC hoped.

The car did have a role in helping to keep AMC going a bit longer, so, in that sense, I’m happy the Alliance existed. I guess that’s enough.

Senior Editor, Jalopnik • Running: 1973 VW Beetle, 2006 Scion xB, 1990 Nissan Pao, 1991 Yugo GV Plus, 2020 Changli EV • Not-so-running: 1977 Dodge Tioga RV (also, buy my book!: https://rb.gy/udnqhh)

Share This Story

Get our newsletter

DISCUSSION

Rebuttal via Steve Lehto

I began practicing in the field of Lemon Law in 1991 and as I learned the nuances of the law and who the players were, I quickly met the worst car ever built. At least since that era. It was the Renault Alliance, marketed in the U.S. by AMC. You’ll recall that American Motors brought us the Gremlin and the Pacer. But those cars were gems compared to the Renault Alliance.

Chrysler eventually bought AMC which many people thought was a genius move because it brought the Jeep brand under their control. The downside? It also brought the liability for the warranty obligations of AMC as well—and that included a fleet of Renault Alliances Americans had foolishly bought. Luckily for Chrysler, those Alliances were no longer being built and sold but the ones on the road were dying, many of them while still under warranty. To sell those Alliances to U.S. consumers, AMC had promised a 5 year/50,000 mile warranty. Most of the cars would not survive their warranty period.

Each of the Big Three automakers has had “litigation prevention” programs at one time or another and in 1991 I had a contact at Chrysler named Jack. I remember him fondly because if I had a really good case against his employer he would ask me to just send over the repair orders and the purchase documents and he would agree to buy the car back with no other effort if the facts checked out. He evaluated the cases fairly, offered what the law required, and he authorized my attorney fees.

Whenever someone came into my office with a Renault Alliance case, I could expect to see them with an armload of repair orders. I remember having secretaries roll their eyes when I asked for a complete set of copies on an Alliance. Once I confirmed the merits of the case, I could call Jack and say, “I have another Alliance.”

“Send me the purchase agreement,” he would say with a weary tone. He did not bother to ask for the repair orders and he would not even ask what was wrong with the car. Why ask? We both knew: Everything was wrong with the car. It’s been 25 years but I have a vague memory of wiring problems, particularly in northern states like Michigan, where moisture caused havoc with a poorly-placed wiring harness or two. I could be wrong on that particularity. But I can be forgiven. Like Jack, I stopped looking too closely at the repair orders too. Once I saw the purchase agreement, I knew Chrysler was going to take care of it. And Jack knew the paperwork was unnecessary. It told us what we all knew already. The car was a Renault Alliance and those were, by definition, Lemons

http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/a32980/the-worst-lemon-ever-built/