Re: mail Digest for 5 May 2005 in hour 15:00

[adh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Sandwich Maker)]

" From: Peter Marano <carmine@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
" 
" 
" > The 4.0 would probably be a great choice, maybe a better one, especially
" > considering you could find a doner with the OD trans and EFI already
" > set up, but, I sure like the look of a AMC V8 under the hood!  I still
" > think you could get great gas mileage from the 290/304 engine properly
" > set up.  Another consideration is the length of the 4.0 in the '65
" > American.  They'll fit, but it's tight up front and I wouldn't sacrifice
" > AC and PS to squeeze it in there.  The V8 sits in there nice.

ps wouldn't be the problem.  it's all on the side of the block.

the 4.0 serp belt setup hugs the block even tighter than the '65
american v-belts; i wouldn't be surprised if you gained an inch, and
that's enough for an a/c condenser isn't it?

" > Jim Boone
" > Mims, FL
" 
" My two cents worth:
" 
" Don't use an overdrive, more parts spinning around will use more fuel. 
" Use the Warner Gear aluminum transmission, if you must the 998 allows 
" the lockup convertor and a lower first gear.  AMC 7&9/16 axles can be 
" had with 2.35:1 and 2.37:1 ratios.

also 2.21, 2.53, and 2.73

" There is no point in using extra gears to spin the drive shaft and 
" pinion faster so that it will turn the ring gear the proper speed.

that's fine once you're moving, but a lower overall first will help
mileage in stop-and-go, not to mention starting on hills.  if you do
a lot of that the tradeoff is worth it.
________________________________________________________________________
Andrew Hay                                  the genius nature
internet rambler                            is to see what all have seen

adh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx                       and think what none thought