Re: New AMC book.... what would you like to see??

[farna@xxxxxxx]

I'm glad I'm getting some good feedback on this!! All who have posted their opinions, I thank, and encourage those who haven't to do so! If you don't want to post publicly on the list, my e-mail address is public, and I'd be happy to hear all opinions.  

This time I'm answering several itmes in one post, last time I thought it would be to hard to track. 

1. Eddie Stakes wrote: 
"Would Jeep be included in a book? There are dozens of Jeep books already out 
there, but without Jeep, AMC probably would not have survived past 1975. And 
without Jeep, hundreds of reproduction items in the past decades would not 
have been made....for AMC owners either."

Jeep would have a chapter with a cursory mention, and be included in the VIN decoding and engine specifications sections at least. I believe that ultimitely Jeep kept AMC afloat, but if you look at sales figures in the early 80s, just before the XJ Cherokee came out, you'll find that it almost took AMC out! AMC had come to rely on Jeep sales to pull them through in the late 70s, then the bottom fell out of the 4x4 market around late 1979/early 1980. That's what drove AMC to give Renault controlling interest in 1980 instead of just 5% as agreed on in 1979 with a gradual increase over many years. It's sad that Renault ended up doing more to "save" AMC over their years of stewardship than Jeep did, but most AMCers revile Renault! True, they made some mistakes early on, but finally got things in order just before politics back in France pretty much forced them to sell. 

2. Concerning this:
>> A guide should help one get started and decode initial information on a
>> vehicle found, and offer guidance and direction, general information
>> so one can spot the aftermarket additions and modifications.

Andrew Hay wrote:
"this argues for orientation cross-series by year, rather than
longitudinally by series, as restoration needs vary much more by age
then model.  likewise restoration parts if any would have more
cross-series application - eg. 01-40, 10-80 - than say all-year 80."

Indeed! So what I did originally was divide the "Cars" section by series. Each series has a running text about each car, noting the styling and mechanical differences as they developed over the years. Occasionally one will refer back to another series -- such as the Series 80 (Ambassador) having a reference back to the Series 10 (Classic/Rebel/Matador) on which it was based. Now in the restoration data section, everything is listed in a chronological order because that's really the only way to prevent massive duplication. So I ended up using BOTH methods of reference. I can't think of a better way. 

3. Andrew Hay also wrote:
"i still think hornets and concords have much more in common than they
have different, and that separating them would cause needless
duplication; likewise separating the '70-up 01s and 40s."

Yes, I do too. I was thinking more along the lines of practical dividing points as far as owners as much as commonality. How interested in Hornets will a Concord owner be, other than possible parts sources, and vice-versa? It would all depend on how detailed individual volumes got as to whether it would be practical to divide them between Hornet/Concord or not. Once you start listing all paint codes and options for every year, the page count starts going up. The truly common data like number decoding is easily duplicated from volume to volume. I know a lot of parts interchange, but that can be mentioned in text easy enough, and I'd definitely mention Concord and Eagle connection in a Hornet guide. 

--
Frank Swygert
Publisher, "American Independent 
Magazine" (AIM)
For all AMC enthusiasts
http://farna.home.att.net/AIM.html
(free download available!)