AMC-List Digest, Vol 7, Issue 45
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
AMC-List Digest, Vol 7, Issue 45
- From: amc-list-request@xxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 05:51:29 +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. Growing AMC Parts (Brien Tourville)
2. Sill stumped -and- missing (Mahoney, John)
3. Re: FART CAN EXHAUST (Tom Jennings)
4. L.A. Old Vehicle Scrapping (JOE FULTON)
5. Re: 65 Ambassador convertible prototypes? (Ken Ames)
6. Re: Spring perch plates... (Ken Ames)
7. AMCer's Opinions: Survivor/Vintage vs. Restored (FMX in AMC)
(francis.swygert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
8. Diary of a crippled white man III (strut rod bushings)
(francis.swygert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
9. Re: M-35/T-96 trans options (Matt Haas)
10. Re: AMCer's Opinions: Survivor/Vintage vs. Restored (Matt Haas)
11. For You Diecast Collectors (Mr. AMC)
12. Re: 65 Ambassador convertible prototypes? (Eddie Stakes)
13. Re: Diary of a crippled white man III (Mark Price)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 16:44:05 -0400
From: "Brien Tourville" <hh7x@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [AMC-List] Growing AMC Parts
To: mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <44EB3455.23526.25D79B5@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
http://tinyurl.com/fl4ud
The AMC Ark is on the Horizon Gentlemen -
keep swimming !
Brien Tourville
NEW YORK
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 17:25:54 -0400
From: "Mahoney, John" <jmahoney@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [AMC-List] Sill stumped -and- missing
To: <amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID:
<E8DF38ACFC17F94998DE284C5CE4582A02202C4F@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>Where would the AMC historical database be?
Fact is that it's not here:
http://www.projekt-lichtblick.de/html/nacht_der_langen_museen_0.html
even if those blue men are
http://tinyurl.com/elnru
and Daimler-Benz books are
http://tinyurl.com/kcjyv
for, sadly, it's not here
http://tinyurl.com/mvjvc
a fact made crystal clear
http://home.earthlink.net/~richhutch/OurFifthAvenuefiles/pentastar.jpg
http://www.chryslerheritage.com/pg904.htm
because the AMC historical database is here.
YOU are! It's now in the hands of AMC fans.
>>
http://motors.search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZjustsaymofo
and
http://prototypeclassicconvertible.blogspot.com
<<
It's almost $15k.
Have you bid yet?
One in a million.
And jokes on AMC.
http://faculty.concord.edu/chrisz/hobby/67-Amb-items/65-990conv2pg.jpg
http://www.amcrc.com/junk/junk20.html
http://www.ioffer.com/img/1074499200/_i/2304069/1.jpg
>>
The oddity here is the extended wheelbase. 63 and 64 Ambassadors shared the Classic wheelbase, they weren't longer until 65. It's quite possible that the car wasn't titled for a year after construction considering it's a prototype. I believe it to be authentic, unless someone changed the serial number plate.
<<
The oddity here is that AMC still suffers such stuff. How strange, if not stupid, is it that any -serious- AMC seller would suggest only one bucket-seated 1965 990 convertible was produced? How unlikely, if not improbable, is it that any -square- 1965 body would have been produced on a line that was assembling "round" 1964 cars on August 1, 1963; let alone with longer wheelbase? If the jigs wouldn't fit, the jig is up.
If an August '63 "panel prototype", it would have been hand-built (and not on a production line); if an "interior mule" for a five-place car, it would have been hand-built more than a year before that; if it smells like fish and it's not a Tarpon or a Marlin, it could be a fish story.
Ain't nothing wrong with the cars.
If they's what you want, go ahead.
Just don't let AMC look like bait.
Today, -you- are the AMC database.
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 17:54:53 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tom Jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] FART CAN EXHAUST
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx, hh7x@xxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0608221752420.5159@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
re: mooflers: I am very happy with the Summit house brand
straight-through muffy on my 258 Hornet. Definitely louder than
stock, rumbly, not sharp, sounds good. A year later, hasn't
gotten buzzy, rattly, etc like a lot of cheap ones. And it was
under $50.
On Tue, 22 Aug 2006, Brien Tourville wrote:
> Even considering some stainless steel COFFEE CAN
> (GASP!), but not too hard!
>
> THanks for your help!
>
> Jesse
>
>
> === ===
>
>
>
>
> my personal favorite are late model
> Mustang muffs - stockers.
>
> "they're designed to sound right"
>
>
>
> Brien Tourville
> NEW YORK
> _______________________________________________
> 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: 4
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 19:28:05 -0700 (PDT)
From: JOE FULTON <piper_pa20@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [AMC-List] L.A. Old Vehicle Scrapping
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <20060823022806.77371.qmail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
I received the Air Distict old vehicle auction notice
just today for the 19 August (last Saturday) auctions.
Because I received this late, I'm thinking that maybe
everyone on their mailing list did too. Therefore the
auctions may be delayed for a week. It has happened
before.
Anyway, there is a 1969 Rambler on the list and the
license number indicates it's a black plate car.
Could it be a Rogue? Who knows. VIN indicates a "B"
engine if the truncated VIN is correct.
Anyway, you can subscribe to their mailing list at
this link:
http://www.aqmd.gov/listserver/default.aspx
Regards,
Joe Fulton
Salinas, CA
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 21:23:22 -0600
From: Ken Ames <ameskg@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] 65 Ambassador convertible prototypes?
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx, Eddie Stakes
<eddiestakes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: <1156303402.44ebca2a1864a@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
The 1969 date would be the date the BLANK form was approved/printed.
Some of the forms we have at work have dates going back 3 and 4 years while the
data added is current.
Ken
Quoting Eddie Stakes <eddiestakes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> On both those 65 Rambler Ambassador convertibles on ebay, I got back a nice
> email from both sellers. I am still confused as to what makes a regular
> production car a prototype. One mentioned the build sheet. But build sheets
> were printed well in advance of models. For instance here is a 71 AMX build
> sheet:
>
> http://www.planethoustonamx.com/parts/71amxbuildsheet.JPG
>
> It don't make it a 69 prototype anything, it still makes it one of 2054 made
>
> in 1971.
>
> So while there is a blog on there, which is neat, I am still either stumped
> or missing something?
>
>
> Eddie Stakes'
> Planet Houston AMX
> 713.464.8825
> eddiestakes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> www.planethoustonamx.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: 6
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 21:38:10 -0600
From: Ken Ames <ameskg@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] Spring perch plates...
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <1156304290.44ebcda214b5c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
You 2 are talking of 2 different items. WR is looking for the EXtra plate that
the antisway bar attaches to, not the normal spring/u-bolt plate.
Ken Ames
Quoting Tom Jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx>:
> On Tue, 22 Aug 2006, William Renshaw wrote:
>
> > Anyone here have a good pair of spring perch plates for a rear sway bar?
> > They mount between the leaf spring and the lower shock mount. I know that I
>
> > can have a set made, but it might be cheaper in the long run to try to find
>
> > an O.E.M. set.
> > Thanks in advance and any responce is greatly appreiciated.
>
> The one with the ear and stud for the shock? If so, on small
> cars 70-up there are differences. The early (70 hornet) part is
> a big fat flat 3/8" plate of steel. 73 and later (no data) have
> a much thinner steel part, with the edges turned up to stiffen.
> It's a lot weaker, and deflects a lot when U-bolts tightened and
> has a tendency to be found cracked. The difference is weight,
> I can't believe would be more than a pound per side.
>
> I have no spares, as our 72 Hornet sheared off a shock mount
> (wrong shocks? who knows) and it ate the spares.
> _______________________________________________
> 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: 7
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 04:18:27 -0000
From: <francis.swygert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [AMC-List] AMCer's Opinions: Survivor/Vintage vs. Restored
(FMX in AMC)
To: <amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID:
<8B4C911BEBA5E24888E353FF362B9E7702E660AA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 09:33 AM
From: jackbarncord@xxxxxxx
I picked up my girlfriend on Friday night, it was summer the year of our
Lord
1973. What to do, what to do? Go cruising like most other Friday
nights and
end up at our usual make out spot? Hey, I have an idea, lets take the
Hornet
down to the shop, pull the engine and clean the engine compartment! You
ready
to get dirty? She agreed and sat patiently on the parts counter while I
pulled
out the 304 w/Ford FMX attached. I cleaned the engine/trans while she
cleaned
the compartment. We took a couple breaks, but I had her home by
midnight and
the Hornet had a sparkling engine, fresh coat of satin black where I
thought it
looked best and the engine compartment hadn't been that clean since I
had
purchased the car.
-----------------------------------
Okay, this is a pet peeve of mine, but that's NOT a Ford FMX
transmission. It's a Borg Warner model 4x. I know it takes an FMX
rebuild kit, but only partially. The FMX valve body is different, and
the pan gasket as well. The internal parts (clutches and bands, drums,
gearing, etc.) all interchange -- at least most do, though gearing may
be different. The reason is the FMX is a modification of the Borg
Warner. In the 50s BW and Studebaker collaborated on an auto trans
design. Ford joined the partnership later, and Stude dropped out a year
or two after Ford joined in (just before Packard bought Stude out, so I
think it was financial reasons Stude had to leave). Fords part of the
deal was to have a license to produce the transmissions, but for cost
savings many of the machined parts were to be interchangeable. So the BW
and FMX are "brothers", but not the same. I'm not sure if the Ford case
will bolt to a BW bell housing or not, but they do have different pan
gaskets IIRC... But I might be getting the FMX confused with the
European version of the BW-35. That model uses the same internal parts
(and rebuild kit) as the AMC version but a different pan gasket. I do
know for sure that the FMX has a totally different valve body that will
not fit the BW model, which indicates a different main case.
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 04:55:19 -0000
From: <francis.swygert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [AMC-List] Diary of a crippled white man III (strut rod
bushings)
To: <amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID:
<8B4C911BEBA5E24888E353FF362B9E7702E660AB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Rod ends are NOT for daily driving! At least not the typical spherical
rod ends. They will beat out and wear fast. For a track car that might
be okay, but a daily driver would have to have the ends changed yearly
(5-10K miles). There are urethane bushed rod ends such as used for four
link rear suspensions that will last, but these are straight through,
not spherical. The rubber seals for spherical rod ends help, but you'd
still have to change them every 18-24 months on a daily driver. The
urethane ends only allow movement in one direction, therefore would have
to be at just the right angle to replace a strut rod bushing.
I see a daily driver as something you actually use, not just weekends
and shows -- 5-7K a year. Half that (the minimum for AMO daily driver
class -- 2500 miles) is still a weekend car to me -- a hobby or fun car,
not a show car, but not a "daily driver" either. Hobby/parade/weekend
cars still get a lot more pampering than a true daily driver even though
the owners aren't afraid to risk a rock chip or possible parking lot
ding. But that's just one man's opinion. Now that I got that out of the
way... ;>
There is, however, a solution that I intend to pursue. Maybe. When I
have time and if I don't get to involved in some other project first....
;>
The AMC suspension more closely follows the Mustang II design for the
lower arm. So use a Mustang II strut rod replacement kit. The kit needed
is the one that uses the stock arm and has tabs that weld to the
chassis. The pivot point is on the same plane as the pivot of the lower
control arm. What I'd like to do is make a bolt on bracket instead of a
weld on, though it would require drilling most likely. I think the strut
rod bracket is way to far back for that. The real problem is I think
there would have to be several bolt on brackets made to fit different
chassis.
DO NOT try to use a Mustang II lower arm that straddles the crossmember
(one pivot on each side)!! I'm not sure the arm would be the correct
length, but there are adjustable types that might work. Since the AMC
lower arm has nothing but the ball joint, at least on late models
(earlier carry the shock, which would be easy to mount to a MII lower
arm with a little fabrication), the length can be adjusted or the arms
cut and welded to fit. I'm surprised no one has done that yet! The
problem with this type arm is the lower crossmember, even some
aftermarket MII lower crossmembers, are not designed for that kind of
stress. Many street rodders have found this out the hard way, bending
and/or cracking welds on their MII front ends. Newer crossmembers are
wider and made of heavier material to prevent this, at least from those
manufacturers who make that type strut rod replacement arms.
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 07:52:25 -0400
From: Matt Haas <mhaas@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] M-35/T-96 trans options
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.2.20060823075123.028fba80@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
<snip>
>" The only problem with V-8 shafts is the CV joint on 63-66 models. Those
>" are the only years that joint was used, and it was only used by one
>" other company -- Lincoln. The joint nor repair parts are no longer made.
>
>i have to comment here. i have a lincoln ['67], and their cv joint is
>just two u-joints back-to-back. the joints themselves are common and
>available, but the coupler - which includes centering springs - is the
>missing piece. i had to score a '68 driveshaft from a junkyard when
>my cv couplers went bad.
One of the vendors (I think it's Galvin's but I'm not 100% sure) sells
replacement CV joint assemblies that use newer, more available parts.
Matt
mhaas@xxxxxxx
Cincinnati, OH
http://www.mattsoldcars.com
1967 Rambler American wagon
1968 Rambler American sedan
===============================================================
According to a February survey of Internet holdouts released by
UCLA's Center for Communication Policy, people cite
not having a computer as the No. 1 reason they won't go online.
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 07:59:06 -0400
From: Matt Haas <mhaas@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] AMCer's Opinions: Survivor/Vintage vs.
Restored
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.2.20060823075612.029076b0@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
<snip>
>I used to rip smog stuff out, but no longer (in fact I plan on
>hookin up the 83 EGR system in my 70 hornet) (just gotta get
>to it this fall :-).
<snip>
EGR is actually a good thing (it reduces cylinder temperature which reduces
pinging) but you don't want it when cold (which is why they're hooked up to
a temperature controlled vacuum switch) and you don't want it at idle
(which is why they're hooked up to ported vacuum).
Matt
mhaas@xxxxxxx
Cincinnati, OH
http://www.mattsoldcars.com
1967 Rambler American wagon
1968 Rambler American sedan
===============================================================
According to a February survey of Internet holdouts released by
UCLA's Center for Communication Policy, people cite
not having a computer as the No. 1 reason they won't go online.
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 11:04:02 -0400
From: AMC74Hornet@xxxxxxxxx (Mr. AMC)
Subject: [AMC-List] For You Diecast Collectors
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx,
AmericanMotorsModelbuilders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
BaadAssGremlins@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, MacsOrphanCarGroup@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
callingalldifferentmodels@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <19506-44EC6E62-122@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII
Check out the Fairfield Mint's Vintage Replica Collection. There is
somthing in there for everybody at reasonably affordable prices. Not the
150$ plus prices of them nuts at the Danbury mint. I plan on getting the
1/18 sale 52 hudson and Metropolitan. I think you guys at Mac's Orphan
Car Group will really find somthing for every one in this catalog.
"Doc"
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 10:10:06 -0500
From: "Eddie Stakes" <eddiestakes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] 65 Ambassador convertible prototypes?
To: "Ken Ames" <ameskg@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: AMC List <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: <017c01c6c6c7$5ded9280$e8f3b148@piageedc1iqa5q>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
This is my point. I believe that the seller is confusing the Aug 1st, 1963
print date on the build sheet with the date the car was made, whihc is
incorrect. For what it is worth, AMC used the "old style"
http://www.planethoustonamx.com/parts/am_old_style_square.JPG
logo on stuff well into the late 1980s. So if your new 77 Gremlin had a
radiator hose on it with this it don't mean the Gremlin was made in 66. The
"new style" logo was found on cars even into late 1990s as parts bins were
emptied out:
http://www.planethoustonamx.com/parts/amc_retangular_sign.JPG
I still saw these logos stamped on belts, hoses, and other engine bay parts
on Jeeps here.
I still say burden of proof rests on the seller. A blog don't prove
anything. I can look at a blog and see Britney Spears got pregnant by Elvis.
Eddie Stakes'
Planet Houston AMX
713.464.8825
eddiestakes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
www.planethoustonamx.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken Ames" <ameskg@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Eddie Stakes"
<eddiestakes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 10:23 PM
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] 65 Ambassador convertible prototypes?
> The 1969 date would be the date the BLANK form was approved/printed.
> Some of the forms we have at work have dates going back 3 and 4 years
> while the
> data added is current.
>
> Ken
>
> Quoting Eddie Stakes <eddiestakes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
>> On both those 65 Rambler Ambassador convertibles on ebay, I got back a
>> nice
>> email from both sellers. I am still confused as to what makes a regular
>> production car a prototype. One mentioned the build sheet. But build
>> sheets
>> were printed well in advance of models. For instance here is a 71 AMX
>> build
>> sheet:
>>
>> http://www.planethoustonamx.com/parts/71amxbuildsheet.JPG
>>
>> It don't make it a 69 prototype anything, it still makes it one of 2054
>> made
>>
>> in 1971.
>>
>> So while there is a blog on there, which is neat, I am still either
>> stumped
>> or missing something?
>>
>>
>> Eddie Stakes'
>> Planet Houston AMX
>> 713.464.8825
>> eddiestakes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> www.planethoustonamx.com
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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: 13
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 11:45:51 -0700
From: Mark Price <markprice242@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] Diary of a crippled white man III
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <23597997.1156358751954.JavaMail.root@web13>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
still kicking! percocet is my new best friend! all went well, now we wait and heal. bone was in 4 pieces! now it has a pin run thru it lengthwise.
i thru the strut rod stuff out for people to chew on. I figure it would only do well for road race/drag race types. i figure it wouldbe harsh/noisey on driver cars.
--
Mark Price
markprice242ATadelphia.net
Morgantown, WV
---- Tom Jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Aug 2006, Mark Price wrote:
> Stayed up till 2:30 am as I have surgery today and can?t eat after midnight.
Good luck! I'm glad it's at least correctible, if not exactly "fun".
> Strut rod bushings. Someone said they interchange with the early mustang pieces. If so, there are a few places that I have seen making pieces for the early Mustangs. Global West, TCP, Or these, all seem to cost about the same.
>
> http://www.streetortrack.com/Street-or-Track-Adjustable-Strut-Rods-pr-16135.html
>
> This second set from TCP is awesome and rebuildable.
>
> http://totalcontrolproducts.com/download/datasheets/STRD_DS_WEB.pdf
Wow! OK, that kills setting-drift flat-dead. But I bet it rides worse
than poly bushings.
> I question their use however as the load is reversed from the designed use. Mustang Bushings are being pulled and AMC is in compression.
I'm sure the manu would know ASAP.
> Granted the solid rod ends will likely not be for everyone, but it is an alternative to 30 year old rubber or crappy aftermarket bushings.
For most uses, the simplest and pretty much absolute fix --
at the expense of increase road noise and shock, and urethane
"groan" -- is the half-polyurethane bushing on the stock
suspension. For adjustable strut rods, it's a trivial drop in,
and it simply does not sag with age. Maybe given enough time,
it will crack or cold-flow, but my cut-down jobs haven't budged
a millimeter in 3? 4? years.
_______________________________________________
AMC-List mailing list
AMC-List@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.amc-list.com/mailman/listinfo/amc-list
or go to http://www.amc-list.com
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
AMC-List mailing list
AMC-List@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.amc-list.com/mailman/listinfo/amc-list
End of AMC-List Digest, Vol 7, Issue 45
***************************************
Back to the Home of the AMC Gremlin