Re: [Amc-list] 70 Donohues

["Armand Eshleman" <aje1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

A further note I should have added at the beginning, or at least just got
off my lazy butt and read the book again.

I have an original copy of Performance American Style that I purchased in
1972.
On page eight there is a chart labeled "best blocks".
And I quote from the "book"...............

1970     360      part number 448 8937*

* "A limited number of these special blocks were installed in 1970 Javelins
to meet homologation requirements for SCCA
Trans Am racing. They feature a beefy lower end with provisions for 4-bolt
main caps. The bore is 4.08, but can be over-bored
to a maximum of 4.187 because it has thicker walls than standard 360
blocks".

If I'd just picked up the book and read it first........

Is that a part of rambler mentality?....................

Armand

P.S. I would guess there must be approximately 2500 or more of these things
that were made...........
Sad part is I've never seen one in the flesh, er, cast iron.........
I would love to find one for my "mythical" # 6 Penske Donohue Trans Am
Javelin  project.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Armand Eshleman" <aje1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "AMC/Rambler owners, drivers and fans." <amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2007 5:54 PM
Subject: Re: [Amc-list] 70 Donohues


> Joe,
>
> Yeah that's what I remember is the crankshaft main webs were thick enough
> that four bolt main caps could be fitted to the engine.
> I dot remember ever hearing about thicker cylinder walls, unless that had
> something to do with the "mythical" service block.
> Rofl.
>
> Armand
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "JOE FULTON" <piper_pa20@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "AMC/Rambler owners, drivers and fans." <amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2007 1:41 PM
> Subject: Re: [Amc-list] 70 Donohues
>
>
> > Armand,
> >
> > I should not have used the term "mythical".  The heavy
> > wall casting AMC 360s are reported to exist.  I just
> > have never seen one.  The engine reportedly had
> > thicker bearing surface webs.   This was rehashed a
> > couple of years ago on the list, but I don't remember
> > the details, casting numbers, etc.
> >
> > Joe Fulton
> >
> > --- Armand Eshleman <aje1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > Joe,
> > > Is it ok if I toss a question in here??
> > > I was unaware that the mythical 360 had heavier
> > > walls also. My memory from
> > > back in 1972 or 73 is of seeing in an AMC book at a
> > > dealer that the special
> > > 360 block had provisions for four bolt main
> > > bearings. Did it also have
> > > heavier cylinder walls than a normal 360??
> > > Armand
> > > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > > From: "JOE FULTON" <piper_pa20@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > To: "AMC/Rambler owners, drivers and fans."
> > > <amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2007 11:26 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [Amc-list] 70 Donohues
> > >
> > >
> > > > Dan,
> > > >
> > > > I don't think you should "pick at that scab."
> > > >
> > > > Tom can speak for himself, but I think what upsets
> > > him
> > > > is the continued misstatements by some people
> > > about
> > > > what is "correct" for a Donohue Javelin.  Tom has
> > > the
> > > > factory literature and it clearly states what is
> > > > correct.  Yes, cars can change after they leave
> > > the
> > > > factory and some people can mistakenly assume that
> > > > their Donohue came with those changes.  Dealers
> > > could
> > > > have made changes too.  Again, Tom has the factory
> > > > literature and knows what the factory said would
> > > be
> > > > included in the Donohue package.  Anything else
> > > would
> > > > not be factory correct.
> > > >
> > > > In my case, I do have a Donohue with a mystery.
> > > The
> > > > car has the X in the VIN number indicating that it
> > > was
> > > > a 390 car.  The previous owner claims that he got
> > > it
> > > > as a young used car and the engine had not been
> > > > changed, but it is a 360 engine.  It is not one of
> > > > those mythical "heavy wall" 360s either.  Who
> > > knows
> > > > what happened?  Facory mistake?  I doubt it.
> > > >
> > > > Joe Fulton
> > > > Salinas, CA
> > > > --- Dan Curtis <d.curtis@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I see Tom is still throwing verbal rocks at
> > > those
> > > > > who have the audacity to make a mistake.
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Amc-list mailing list
> > > > Amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > http://www.amc-list.com/mailman/listinfo/amc-list
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -- 
> > > > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > > > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > > > Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.12.2/967 -
> > > Release Date: 8/22/07
> > > 6:51 PM
> > > >
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Amc-list mailing list
> > > Amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > http://www.amc-list.com/mailman/listinfo/amc-list
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Amc-list mailing list
> > Amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://www.amc-list.com/mailman/listinfo/amc-list
> >
> >
> >
> > -- 
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.12.2/967 - Release Date: 8/22/07
> 6:51 PM
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Amc-list mailing list
> Amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.amc-list.com/mailman/listinfo/amc-list
>
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.12.2/967 - Release Date: 8/22/07
6:51 PM
>
>
_______________________________________________
Amc-list mailing list
Amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.amc-list.com/mailman/listinfo/amc-list