AMC-List Digest, Vol 7, Issue 47
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
AMC-List Digest, Vol 7, Issue 47
- From: amc-list-request@xxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 00:34:20 +0000
Send AMC-List mailing list submissions to
amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://www.amc-list.com/mailman/listinfo/amc-list
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
amc-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
You can reach the person managing the list at
amc-list-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of AMC-List digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: AMC-List Digest, Vol 7, Issue 46 (Jim Boone)
2. Re: torpedoed/65 rambler prototype auction (Mark Price)
3. '69 AMX front suspension change (dan whitehead)
4. Re: : AMC Eagle Better than a Corvette? (Jim Blair)
5. Re: Nobody home here? Something Bad Hapen? (RetroRalph)
6. Re: Nobody home here? Something Bad Hapen? (Tom Jennings)
7. Re: torpedoed 65 rambler prototype ebay auction (Eddie Stakes)
8. my 62 classic custom project (d stohler)
9. Summertime (Mahoney, John)
10. Autoweek TA Article (Dan Curtis)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 09:44:53 -0400
From: "Jim Boone" <fljab@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] AMC-List Digest, Vol 7, Issue 46
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <BAY116-F9F775E8F7D5C811AD2D59AC440@xxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
>From: amc-list-request@xxxxxxx
>Reply-To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 23:11:54 -0700
>From: "Jamie Smith" <oconner51@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [AMC-List] AMC Eagle Better than a Corvette?
>Yesterday at work one of our regular customers came by to show off his new
>bright yellow 2000 Corvette. A coworker and I were standing in the parking
>lot looking at it when another customer pulled in. He started walking
>towards us and Mike started "puffing up" getting ready to tell the guy all
>about his Corvette when suddenly the guy asks "Hey, who owns the AMC Eagle
>over there". <snip>
I have a similar experiance:
Every yr, I usually go to both car shows at the Daytona Speedway. In the
spring, the Florida AMC car clubs band together and we have prime parking in
the middle. But in the fall (which is the bigger show), parking is "pot
luck" as I don't have a group to go with, so just have to find a spot among
the masses of cars.
A couple of yrs ago I went in and found a spot next to this high dollar '32
Ford Coupe with a blown BBC. Lots of chrome and polish, he had to have
somewhere around $100K into this thing. I parked next to him in my '69
Rambler (American) that is nice, but certainly not in that league. I said
"Hi" to him, but he was kinda looking down at me and my car, no big deal.
Through the course of the day, I had as many, if not more, folks that came
by and look at the Rambler as he did for his car. Lots of old Rambler
stories with all asking if the seats folded down (they don't). The coupe
guy was kinda miffed; I don't think he understood!
Of course, anyone that will stuff a Cheby motor in a non-Cheby product has a
basic difference in attitude that I do to start with...
Jim Boone
Mims, FL
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 7:55:10 -0700
From: Mark Price <markprice242@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] torpedoed/65 rambler prototype auction
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: francis.swygert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <14328633.1156431310388.JavaMail.root@web29>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
I agee the high bid prices are justified. it's about time to see these cars bring prices comparable to the more popular cars. I hope the bidders realize the cars aren't prototypes. I also hope mine gets this type of attention when it is done. I questioned building the car untill I realized that I would not even hesitate to build it if it was 1965 Mustang!
--
Mark Price
markprice242ATadelphia.net
Morgantown, WV
---- francis.swygert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> It is possible that the people selling realized that it most likely is
> not a "prototype" of anything. What led them to believe it was a
> pre-production or prototype was the 1963 date on the build sheet. After
> viewing a couple build sheets recently it's obvious that AMC made some
> orders 18-24 months in advance. This makes sense -- the company has to
> have cars ready for dealers when they come out, and the factory needs
> build sheets well in advance so they know what parts to have ready (and
> to order). So the process has to start that far in advance. Once
> everything is set up and running it wouldn't take to long to build a few
> more cars as orders came in. The serial or last six numbers of a VIN
> indicate what sequence the car was ordered in. An AMX build sheet on
> Eddies site has a date two years before the car (67 for a 69, I
> believe). The "prototype" remarks come from that date, and I suppose is
> a reasonable assumption not knowing how the factory operated. I was
> willing to give them the benefit of the doubt at first, but my request
> for a photo of the serial number and door tags were ignored. I told them
> specifically that I'd been asked about authenticating the car as a
> possible prototype or pre-production model, and signed the e-mail as
> editor of AIM. I'm pretty convinced it's just a nice convertible. Still,
> a nice mid 60s AMC V-8 convertible should be worth $12K or so. Price a
> Chevy or Ford mid size convertible in as good a condition. You'll get
> more looks with the AMC too!
> _______________________________________________
> AMC-List mailing list
> AMC-List@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.amc-list.com/mailman/listinfo/amc-list
>
> or go to http://www.amc-list.com
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 15:46:24 +0000
From: "dan whitehead" <freebird_58@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [AMC-List] '69 AMX front suspension change
To: mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <BAY111-F1224BE340A4F76582FCE3A94440@xxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Is the only difference on the '69 AMX the shock towers from a '70. I'm
really considering either changing over to the '70 style or going with a new
setup from Heidts or one of the other companys that make front suspensions.
Yes, I know that would change the '69 from original, but I really don't
care.
Dan Whitehead
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 08:53:57 -0700
From: "Jim Blair" <carnuck@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] : AMC Eagle Better than a Corvette?
To: mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <BAY114-F27FED73D475A2E1C03B2A7AC440@xxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
A: I have been surprised by the looks and comments my '73 J4000 (which is in
pretty sad looking condition) has generated when I take it to work in the
ritzy area of Bellevue. The common one is "Is that an M715?" to which I
reply "No. That's it's younger little brother". It seems whenever I take it
in (which I don't often do as it is usually full of junk I have been sorting
out or building materials for my cabin) I get one or 2 early H1 owners pop
by to check it out. Some even know about the connection back to Jeep of
their H1s through AMG.
I'm wondering how they will react to my '84 J10 once it's rolling again?
From: "Jamie Smith" <oconner51@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [AMC-List] AMC Eagle Better than a Corvette?
To: <amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: <BAY109-DAV2AD872D2C7A0F8F879819BF440@xxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Yesterday at work one of our regular customers came by to show
off his new bright yellow 2000 Corvette. A coworker and I were
standing in the parking lot looking at it when another customer
pulled in. He started walking towards us and Mike started
"puffing up" getting ready to tell the guy all about his
Corvette when suddenly the guy asks "Hey, who owns the AMC Eagle
over there". I told him it was mine and he said "Man, that is a
cool car. I love that car. The 'Vette is ok but I want to own
one of those Eagles". At this point Mike got in his Car and
slammed the door and started to leave. He made it very clear
that he wasn't happy about this other guy saying his Corvette
was "OK" and then oohing and aahhing over my Eagle.
Jamie Smith
Spokane, WA
oconner51@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:oconner51@xxxxxxxxxxx>
1966 Rambler American 220 Station Wagon
1966 Rambler Classic 770 two Door Hardtop
1977 GMC Sierra 3/4 ton Pickup
1984 AMC Eagle Limited Station Wagon
1986 AMC Eagle Station Wagon
1993 Dodge Caravan (pending)
_________________________________________________________________
Got something to buy, sell or swap? Try Windows Live Expo
ttp://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwex0010000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://expo.live.com/
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 09:33:38 -0700
From: "RetroRalph" <retroralph@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] Nobody home here? Something Bad Hapen?
To: <amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: <002d01c6c79b$0e3f5e10$6400a8c0@ralphs1>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=iso-8859-1;
reply-type=original
OK, OK... Dang! You caught me holding my breath... Glad all is ready for
the "GO" button here. I must be paranoid, too.
Nap time... TTYL
______________________________________________________________
Ralph Ausmann - Hillsboro, OR - > <ralph.ausmann@xxxxxxxxx>
http://mysite.verizon.net/res79g4m/
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Jennings" <tomj@xxxxxxx>
Cc: <amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 10:23 PM
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] Nobody home here? Something Bad Hapen?
> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006, RetroRalph wrote:
>
>> Web site does not respond and no mail received here today... And things
>> were
>> going so well for so long...
>>
>> Wake me up when things are working again. Thanks.
>
> YO! WAKE UP!
>
> My bad -- the host machine was moved, and I neglected to restart
> the webserver (requires password entry). (We're paranoid.)
>
> _______________________________________________
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 10:02:40 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tom Jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] Nobody home here? Something Bad Hapen?
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0608240947400.15986@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Thu, 24 Aug 2006, RetroRalph wrote:
> OK, OK... Dang! You caught me holding my breath... Glad all is ready for
> the "GO" button here. I must be paranoid, too.
Gotcha! :-)
I should have elaborated...
The machine that amc-list.com and the mailing list software is
hosted on, turing.wps.com, is a modest 2-rack-unit computer. It
got physically moved on Monday to better digs. It's in a maximum
security international telecom colocation in Seattle; my friend
Randy who rents the rack ran out of room and had to expand a
few racks down. It's got dual A/B power (separate feeds into
the building, from two different municipal grids!), generator
backup, and over a gigabit/sec of connectivity, two hops from
international backbone routers. (Traceroute to it!) It's quite
an honored site that I'm very flattered to have a machine in.
Anyways, it got shutdown, moved, restarted; down time was just a
few minutes. After restart it was accepting and delivering mail.
The mailing list software and web server however require manual
start as they are internally passworded. This means only that
mail sent to the list wasn't distributed until manual start;
it's received OK and nothing (zero) was lost.
Even if turing.wps.com stayed down for an extended period,
it has MX backups to recieve mail; the list would not go OUT
until turing was brought up, but incoming mail would not be
lost unless it was down for 4 days continuously. About daily,
the entire mailing list (member list, mail archive, overhead,
etc) is copied to a machine 1200 miles away.
Since none of us live up there, about every 4 - 5 years we
simply buy another computer, ready it in LA or San Fran, and
ship it up. We've got enough users of the machine that passing
the hat for new hardware is pretty damn cheap.
This exalted position is left over from my early internet days.
I'm spoiled; we had our own class B address block and ASN (2914).
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 11:08:09 -0500
From: "Eddie Stakes" <eddiestakes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] torpedoed 65 rambler prototype ebay auction
To: "AMC List" <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: <012601c6c7a3$440988b0$e8f3b148@piageedc1iqa5q>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Frank wrote:
Date: Thursday, August 24, 2006 03:27 AM
From: francis.swygert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
It is possible that the people selling realized that it most likely is
not a "prototype" of anything. What led them to believe it was a
pre-production or prototype was the 1963 date on the build sheet. After
viewing a couple build sheets recently it's obvious that AMC made some
orders 18-24 months in advance. This makes sense -- the company has to
have cars ready for dealers when they come out, and the factory needs
build sheets well in advance so they know what parts to have ready (and
to order). So the process has to start that far in advance. Once
everything is set up and running it wouldn't take to long to build a few
more cars as orders came in. The serial or last six numbers of a VIN
indicate what sequence the car was ordered in. An AMX build sheet on
Eddies site has a date two years before the car (67 for a 69, I
believe). The "prototype" remarks come from that date, and I suppose is
a reasonable assumption not knowing how the factory operated. I was
willing to give them the benefit of the doubt at first, but my request
for a photo of the serial number and door tags were ignored. I told them
specifically that I'd been asked about authenticating the car as a
possible prototype or pre-production model, and signed the e-mail as
editor of AIM. I'm pretty convinced it's just a nice convertible. Still,
a nice mid 60s AMC V-8 convertible should be worth $12K or so. Price a
Chevy or Ford mid size convertible in as good a condition. You'll get
more looks with the AMC too!I agree, in my humble but loudmouthed opinion,
this car looks like it should fetch $12K-$16K. However, it takes more than a
blog to make a point. We can pull up Dan Rather's blog to see how inaccurate
it is. I nicely asked them for more info and was simply told "you go look at
blog" which again, takes me back to square one. I have a lot more build
sheets not loaded on my site inclduing some for some unusual cars. There
were no California 500 Special AMXs made in October 67, for thr 69 model
year for instance. Maybe October 68 (because production began for 69 models
in Aug 68) but not 67. to me at least, it would seem aMC simply used build
sheets 'on hand'. Maybe like some of the parts in the parts bins.
It is a wonderful looking car, (the 65) however when you make some sort of
comment like one of one, people are going to ask you some questions,
especially those who are serious about possibly adding a vehicle like that
to their collection.
If it was a car like the Mustang that is on the current cover of Hemmings
Muscle Machines, a 67(?) Shelby....prototype.....that is a little different.
It is documented. And at least to me, it takes more than a blog and piece of
paper to authenticate something that should have a paper trail a mile long.
Eddie Stakes'
Planet Houston AMX
713.464.8825
eddiestakes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
www.planethoustonamx.com
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 10:44:50 -0700 (PDT)
From: d stohler <das24rules@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [AMC-List] my 62 classic custom project
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <20060824174450.56395.qmail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
i have gotten ahold of a bw overdrive unit for the t96 and tt. however, it did not include the solenoid, or the governer, or any of the other electrical parts i guess it will need. can anyone help me in locating these parts? i am going to be going home from iraq for r&r leave for a couple weeks and would love to have the parts so i can install so i can take the rambler on my road trip. any help would be GREAT. thanks
dave stohler
camp taji iraq
---------------------------------
Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help. Yahoo! Small Business.
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 17:26:30 -0400
From: "Mahoney, John" <jmahoney@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [AMC-List] Summertime
To: <amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID:
<E8DF38ACFC17F94998DE284C5CE4582A02202C53@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Being "fraudulently tampered with" resulted in a halving of the "high bid" and disappearance of multiple "bidders" --- but the "prototype blog" is unchanged. That's AMC. Too bad.
http://tinyurl.com/nlpgm
As was the tone in a question/answer section of the first listing: bad.
>>
it's obvious that AMC made some orders 18-24 months in advance. This makes sense -- the company has to have cars ready for dealers when they come out, and the factory needs build sheets well in advance so they know what parts to have ready (and to order). So the process has to start that far in advance. Once everything is set up and running it wouldn't take to long to build a few more cars as orders came in.
<<
True, but not in this instance. Tooling for the '65 outer skins --- an unusual (for AMC) number of which were "ALL-NEW" --- had been approved; when this "prototype" was built, no new dies had been cast, thus no new panels had been stamped. At this date, any Engle-d AMC would have come from the pre-production [Detroit] workshop --- not off the Kenosha line.
It's a perfectly nice regular-production '65 Ambassador 990 convertible.
It's worth the $12k or $14k or whatever real money was/is bid to buy it.
It'd be worth more if it were a 1965 Impala/Bonneville/Galaxie/whatever.
It'd be worth more if AMC weren't still that "weird-n-wacky" car choice.
In the summer of 2006, American Motors still "rains" on its own parades.
And ignores --- in this 2006 venue, almost totally --- its own history.
A week ago, some new old Detroit design photos appeared before my eyes.
I bought them mainly for the [1950s] Studebaker-Packard and GM content.
Some I'd never seen; some of those: AM studio photos you've never seen.
Some of those were taken in the summer of 1955, some in summer of 1956.
One was particularly interesting: it showed how AM intended to succeed.
In the summer of 1956, beside a [LWB] 1958 Ambassador was a 1956 #2413.
If you know American cars, you know what that means. If you don't, go.
http://www.gmphotostore.com/prodinfo.asp?number=53216929
On its own, that AMC looked like it had a sort of "king-maker" styling.
In a real world, the AMC looked like it was short of a shot to succeed.
It looked short where the Chevy stretched; its cowl was clunky instead of smooth; its details --- which looked excellent for Nash, Hudson, or Rambler --- would've looked amateurish under the sun by Saarinen's new styling dome. AMC had a dream, AMC had a desire; AMC had a difficult road to travel to survive or succeed, but AMC didn't have what it took to become the best --- or among the best-regarded --- cars in history.
Made me think of today's AMC. Or what little of it seems to be seen.
Image and styling sold more cars than engineering, performance, price, quality, and economy combined --- in 1956 and in 2006. AMC was never able to burnish its image and, even when AMC -finally- came closer to Detroit in the quality of its styling (circa 1963 through circa 1979), its image continued to tarnish even the best chances for success that AMC could see. Today AMC fans bask in their own AM sunshine: Rambler, Javelin, AMX, Machine and many more. But what shadow has AMC cast in the -real- world? 1985 Taurus is revolutionary; 1975 Pacer is an AMC joke. Rabbit is revived [1971 Redux], so too is Roald Dahl's [1943] "Gremlin." Will time see AMC's [1970.5] Gremlin as an L-car on the distant and less Omnipresent historical Horizon or what feckless Fez drove on TV Land downloads from those silly '70s to next gen's chip-implanted brains? If many of you AMC collectors are cranky cases in 2006, gee, you'll hate the post-DaimlerChrysler-era auto shell game!
When ToyotaGeneralMotors, NissanFord, and HyundaiEtAl battle it out.
(If Disney and Updike fly above your head, Shelby GLH may hit home.)
AMC is still a "sort-of" something. Isn't it ever going to be more?
AMC has had almost 20 years since it folded to turn its image around.
This is the closest thing there is to a community of AMC experts, so:
How you doin'? How's AMC doin'? Bigger-n-better? Y'all satisfied?
You got a couple clubs; you got a few shows; you get a word-in-print now-n-then. Good for you. You got a museum? You got an archive? A place where AMC can survive to succeed? You got a Camry or a Camaro or a Caribbean beside a styling studio prototype for your -2056- AMC car?
You got a ways to go; you got a way to go; what's keeping you down?
Look around; be as smart (or smarter) than the other guy. -Drive-!
Back the future: 1950s.
In the summer of 1955, America reigned as king of an automotive world.
http://tinyurl.com/o33mv
http://tinyurl.com/nf4kl
In the summer of 1956, America assembled the last king car in Detroit.
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/2142/1270/1600/47.0.jpg
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/2142/1270/1600/62.0.jpg
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/2142/1270/1600/100_0244.0.jpg
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/2142/1270/1600/1933%20Packard.jpg
Many are called, few are chosen, but only one will be King-for-a-Day.
http://www.pebblebeachconcours.net/
("Hey, didn't I see that car in the resto shop back east last fall?")
http://tinyurl.com/nyw6l
In the summer of 2006, America doesn't know to give a king its "Due"!
http://tinyurl.com/nkeh9
Fix cars because you like them, not to win awards: love their history.
You may even drive them now and then: someone may even take a picture.
http://tinyurl.com/npzpo
Study the past and pass it on to the future: make your efforts endure.
Keep reminding America what it accomplished in 1933 and 1956 and 1970.
Don't let America forget what it had done or fall into future failure.
Remember the America of doing more: of Duesenberg and Packard and AMC.
Maybe you will trade a whole AMC for a filing cabinet full of history.
Maybe you will remember a Patrician #5682-4775 built on June 25, 1956.
Maybe you will remember a Packard-and-AMC man who once did big things.
On July 16, 1956, he did the last line on his all-new-for-1957 design.
On August 20, 1956, the last line to the last Detroit royal was drawn.
He had to do big things again. He had to make a Studebaker a Packard.
He did: in three weeks styling was finished; in six, tooling approved.
The last Packard he would design before he would design an Ambassador.
But before he left, he remembered the past. He did a big little more.
http://www.autohistory.org/review_9.html
America --- and American Motors --- can do more in the summer of 2006.
In the summer of 1999, America did not know its "1956" from its -1953-
http://info.detnews.com/joyrides/story/index.cfm?id=113
as this is a 1956 Caribbean [at least he could spell it!] convertible
http://www.adclassix.com/images/56packardcaribbeanconv.jpg
http://tinyurl.com/m4yxo
and this is what America has allowed its king of the world to become.
Click "next" a dozen times each
http://tinyurl.com/qsh75
http://tinyurl.com/pjubu
It's a 1942 Plymouth: built when America saved the world. Once more.
>>
While the Nash Ambassador was called the Kenosha Cadillac, the first
car on the AMC family tree to copy an "exclusive" of Cadillac was neither a Nash nor an Ambassador. What and when?
<<
>>
Has to be dual reservoir brakes, split with front and rear cirsuits for
safety, the entire Rambler line for 1962. If that's the case, "nor an
Ambassador" isn't exactly true -- it was on the Rambler Ambassador also.
But not exclusive to Ambassador, if that's what was meant.
<<
At least one AMC fan read, researched, and responded (Thanks!), but no, you need to start way back before the -first- World War. Turn it over in your head; it'll spark an answer. History isn't always dull; sometimes it's Delco.
AMC history isn't just about Jeffery and Rambler and Nash. And Jav/AMX.
I've attended only one US car show this summer (plus one strange show-n-shine on a hillside [a Skyline club overlooking the skyline?] in Japan [they sure do different things to accessorize their rides]): it reminded me of AMC also. A one-off that once lived nearby was on display, delivered in an air-conditioned cocoon (a/c in the trailer was run continuously while the car was "outside" --- as one of the two cars in an indoor [also air-conditioned] showroom --- who cares about oil cost and dependence?), so it certainly deserved some special handling. Which, in 2006, must mean excess. (If interested, read about it at:
http://www.kerbeck.com/kerbeck/kerbeck.nsf/Worlds_Oldest_Corvette
and think of the girl driving it back-n-forth to school: history.)
The AMC point was outside, though. Corvette show = AMX show. Nice but not nice enough to die for. Fun but not fully fulfilling. Only part of full story.
Don't overlook the rest.
Redo the '50s. Do more.
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 17:34:12 -0700
From: "Dan Curtis" <d.curtis@xxxxxxx>
Subject: [AMC-List] Autoweek TA Article
To: <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: <000501c6c7de$30401110$0300a8c0@D14DCP61>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
I just pulled my Autoweek magazine out of the mailbox this afternoon and
there on page 21 is a full page write-up by Leigh Dorrington of a beautiful
1970 TA Javelin owned by Bill Scheffler from Westport, CT with just 21K
miles. The overall article is very complimentary of both this specific TA
as well as the AMC muscle car initiative from the late 60s through the early
70s.
To quote part of the article: "The 390 starts and idles with a magnificent
rumble. The power steering is lighter than expected and the brake pedal
goes down a long way before anything happens. Push the accelerator though,
and all is forgotten. First and Second are short, (but) shift into third and
fourth and the car just pulls and pulls and pulls some more."
Yep, that would be the trusty AMC 390 and a stock one at that. I an sure he
would have been absolutely amazed if the 390 had just a few upgrades like a
750 carb, MSD electronic distributor and even a mild cam along with less
restrictive exhaust to take those stock 1970 340 ponies up to say the
375-400 mark or even a little higher which, as most of us old AMC motor
heads know, is very easy to do without radical changes to the motor!
Regards,
Dan Curtis
d.curtis@xxxxxxx
602-317-2018
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
AMC-List mailing list
AMC-List@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.amc-list.com/mailman/listinfo/amc-list
End of AMC-List Digest, Vol 7, Issue 47
***************************************
Back to the Home of the AMC Gremlin