AMC-List Digest, Vol 7, Issue 50

[amc-list-request@xxxxxxx]

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. Parting out 82 Concord (R L)
   2. Re: 69 Vs 70 suspension (Sandwich Maker)
   3. Re: 6 cylinder help/belts! (Jim Blair)
   4. Re: Loaded Calipers (Mark Price)
   5. Re: 69 Vs 70 suspension (Mark Price)
   6. Re: 6 cylinder help/ Belts (John Elle)
   7. Mustang II Suspension? (John Elle)
   8. Re: Mustang II suspension? (Mr. AMC)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 13:29:27 +0000
From: "R L" <super70ty@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [AMC-List] Parting out 82 Concord
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <BAY114-F2891C3DE1897002E454D6DA43A0@xxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

If anyone needs any parts from a 82 Concord let me know. Can ship smaller 
parts. It does have a bug shield that I will ship. I have one door handle 
left from the passanger side. Good glass, iintermettent wipers, rear defrost 
window. Email me for picutures or prices. I plan on taking the car to the 
crusher by friday of next week. The car is in Gurley, AL which is 20 min 
West of Huntsville, AL in North Alabama. Thanks Ryan




------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 10:11:56 -0400 (EDT)
From: adh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Sandwich Maker)
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] 69 Vs 70 suspension
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <200608261411.k7QEBu409631@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

" From: Matt Haas <mhaas@xxxxxxx>
" 
" 
" I think American's went to a lower ball joint for 1964.

they did.

" Also, the front suspension is identical between same year American's, 
" Javelin's and AMX's except for springs and probably shocks.

i'm not sure the springs are different.

" I think there was a different lower ball joint (and possible steering
" knuckle) for the first couple years on American's but I don't have the
" inclination to dig through parts books at the moment.

that's true; they changed mid '66 in anticipation of the v8.
________________________________________________________________________
Andrew Hay                                  the genius nature
internet rambler                            is to see what all have seen
adh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx                       and think what none thought


------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 08:11:29 -0700
From: "Jim Blair" <carnuck@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] 6 cylinder help/belts!
To: mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <BAY114-F33EF5FC90FCBE39A2CD6F1AC3A0@xxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

I would look into an '84 to '86 2.5L XJ for the V pulleys and brackets to 
run w/o an air pump (many come with PS and even AC!)

Jim Blair, Seattle, WA '84 J10 Black Jack (getting lifted and stroked!), '73 
J4000 304/TH400/QT tow truck http://www.virtualjeep.com

AMC list subscription options link
http://www.amxfiles.com/amc-list/options.cfm

_________________________________________________________________
All-in-one security and maintenance for your PC.  Get a free 90-day trial!   
http://www.windowsonecare.com/trial.aspx?sc_cid=msn_hotmail



------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 9:40:31 -0700
From: Mark Price <markprice242@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] Loaded Calipers
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: JOE FULTON <piper_pa20@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID:
	<25517706.1156610431779.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

Yeah, well if she does then she has to entertain me!
Besides I just saved a lot on the brakes for my car! These cost me $35 for loade caliper pair delivered!
 Bare calipers are $20.00 ea local with tax, plus bolts and shims that are included with these loaded calipers! 
  I have new set of drop plates I bought off a guy on the amc-forum. they do drop and mount these calipers over 12" redrilled 2000 WJ rotors. This setup goes on the American as I want to ryn stock wheels on the Ambo for now. I have a complete 82-83 setup on the American that I will move to the Ambassador.
  What need to do is decide on an axle for the Ambassador. I'm 90% sure I will install the turbo 400 and an open driveline when I do this and be done with it.
--
Mark Price
markprice242ATadelphia.net
Morgantown, WV


---- JOE FULTON <piper_pa20@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: 
> I just stumbled across these loaded calipers on eBay.
> IIRC [I hope I recall
> correctly as I ordered a set!] they are the correct
> calipers for the 82-83 AMC
> brakes and the price is excellent.
> 
> eBay item # 150023770332
> 
> --
> Mark Price
> markprice242ATadelphia.net
> Morgantown, WV
> 
> Mark,
> 
> You have too much free time on your hands.  Your wife
> is going to have to terminate your computer
> privileges.
> 
> Joe Fulton
> Salinas, CA
> _______________________________________________
> 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: 5
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 10:05:16 -0700
From: Mark Price <markprice242@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] 69 Vs 70 suspension
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID:
	<16796726.1156611916434.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

The trunion is not the limiting facter in these cars. In stock config, I would point more towards spring rate,tire,lack of sway bars,slow vague steering box. None of thisis fixed by getting rid of the trunion. The only bolt in replacement that I know of really is just a bolt in fancy trunion! Not a true ball joint at all. I mounts a coil over, no big improvement to a strret car.
My current American set up is Prothane bushings except for rubber struts.
low pressure Gabriel gas classic [IIRC] shocks
used V-8 Roque springs.
1 5/8" lowering plates.
205/60/15 front runners on GM repop 15X7" rally wheels withplain police caps.
rear is AMC15 with doubled leaf srings 1.5" lowering blocks. cracked rubber bushings.
Hydraulic shocks off a parts car.
255/60/15 on the GM rallys.
My plans are to install front and rear sway bars, new urethane rear spring bushings and it will be done ,someday. I would never consider cutting the front off this car to fix something that ain't broke.
  However as-is it handles excellent, lacks a bit of road feel due to the 73 Hornet box I use. In stock config it floated and swayed.
  The only thing I can say is if'n I was cuttin I would likely committ sacrilege and install the heavier mustang II system. Tha extra room you gain and the incredible availability of bolt in parts plus the rack just plain seem to me to out weigh the dissadvantage of it being heavy.
 Anyone know how much heavier the MII is???
Mark Price
markprice242ATadelphia.net
Morgantown, WV


---- Matt Haas <mhaas@xxxxxxx> wrote: 
> Also, besides my 43,000 mile 67 American wagon, I also had a 50 something 
> thousand mile 68 Valiant. Both with a six cylinder and automatic. The 
> American handles much better than the Valiant did (which isn't saying much 
> since my 96 Ram handles better than either one of those cars). My personal 
> feeling is that the suspension on the American is great for what it is 
> (60's economy car) but for the most part, even the best handling cars of 
> that era are no match for a present day economy car. Suspension and tire 
> technology have improved a lot in the past 40 years.
> 
> 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.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 14:46:58 -0700
From: "John Elle" <johnelle@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] 6 cylinder help/ Belts
To: mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <000201c6c959$2ca10420$40dd0d82@john1>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"

Richard
SNIP
Does anyone have a lead on where to find a good pic for the placement of
all
the front stuff again.
SNIP
I now have edited out some pictures that may help.
John


------------------------------

Message: 7
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 22:22:53 -0700
From: "John Elle" <johnelle@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [AMC-List] Mustang II Suspension?
To: mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <000701c6c998$dd3c3400$a7dd0d82@john1>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="US-ASCII"

SNIP
The only thing I can say is if'n I was cuttin I would likely committ
sacrilege and install the heavier mustang II system. Tha extra room you
gain
and the incredible availability of bolt in parts plus the rack just
plain seem
to me to out weigh the dissadvantage of it being heavy.
 Anyone know how much heavier the MII is???
SNIP
 
The simple Mustang II suspension conversion (probably more politically
correct than referring to it also as the Pinto conversion or Mercury
Bobcat conversion) has become almost the standard of the industry as
basic parts in fabricating a some what modern front suspension
alternative to knee action, solid axle, hard to find or antiquated front
suspensions of a wide variety of modified cars in the hobby. It too has
a single bushing lower control arm with a strut rod that goes forward
rather than rearward in the car leaving the lower control arm to go
through a weird pivot motion of one bushing and a funky strut rod
location. 
 
The following is from a web site that sells Mustang II suspension
options. 
The Mustang II (MII) suspension geometry originally came from the '70
Pinto. It was designed in the late '60s specifically as a cheap-to-make
setup for a four-cylinder car with. This made the MII system relatively
inexpensive for rodders to purchase and fairly simple to install in
their rods. The real bonus was that it had a narrow track, making it
perfect for rods, plus it had rack-and-pinion steering-possibly the
first American car to come so equipped. The system was simple and
compact, and offered pretty good geometry. Perhaps best of all, the
crossmember could be purchased separately from the local Ford dealer
while the remaining components were readily available at the local
wrecking yard.
 
The rest of the article can be read at the following URL;
http://www.rodandcustommagazine.com/techarticles/custom_mustang_II_suspe
nsion/
 
Since than the basic Pinto parts have been supplemented by aftermarket
with a full lower control arm supported by 2, not 1 bushing and this
gets rid of the strut rod!
 
By the way a simple web search using Yahoo and Mustang II Suspension as
an exact phrase came up with 9200+ web sites while the same search using
the words Trunion +AMC came up with 188. Do I detect a difference in
popularity?
 
I do not know anyone that has actually adapted a Mustang II suspension
in any form to any AMC automobile. Probably at least one reason is no
matter what type of suspension the AMC car has for street use, they are
rebuildable and functional when done and probably with an all ball joint
suspension well under $250.00 in parts for almost everything and with
trunions probably well under $600.00 in parts. While most people I know
do it them selves I am sure a number of people have it done. I have
rebuild about 2 dozen '70 and newer front suspensions. If that is the
case my guess that you may see $1500 or so bills on it. Maybe more.
 
Now the previously mentioned number does not include adding hubs and
brakes to the cost but that can be done in parts generally for a number
between $100 and $500 in parts and once again is usually handled by the
owner and how good a scrounger he is and what he or she will re-use
rather than re-place. 
I have a whole usable disk brake system on a shelf that can be bolted
onto any AMC car I own that I got for nothing by just stripping a car
that was going to be crushed. 
 
The question was, what is the weight of a Pinto Suspension. That may
very a bit depending on the source but for the sake of argument let us
identify the source as Fat Man Fabricators. 
Url is www.fatmanfab.com <http://www.fatmanfab.com/>  . Their affordable
IFS starts out as a $1495.00 cost plus shipping. The stage II with
polished A arms start at $1795. The Stage III with polished stainless,
pro style shock towers and GENUINE PRO Coil-overes slides in at an even
$2195 with air suspension only $2795.00. Notice the operative words
"starts at"!
Now I am not sure the above numbers are related to weight or not, but
that seems pretty heavy to me. 'Specially when I can not sell my
completed and modified Spirit for much over $900.00 and these parts have
not been installed yet. 
Now granted these are hub to hub units and the cross member can probably
substitute for the AMC unit and become the motor mount too, but I have
not included the cost of welding all of this together, or learning to
weld or buying a welder. A tool I will bet that many of us do not have.
I just got mine 5 years ago and I have been in the hobby since 1956.
 
An alternative to Fat Man is Street Rod Engineering, URL
www.streetrodengineering.com <http://www.streetrodengineering.com/>   in
Lake Havasu. This leaves about 9,198 others to check out to determine if
this is the type of money that needs to be spent to correct something
that is not currently broken or if broken can be repaired for something
under a grand for the most part. 
 
I dunno, but I don't see this solution becoming to popular! Is it
doable? Yuh, I think it is and probably easier than most people realize
but of course there is the matter of installing the rack and pinion
steering and getting the steering box hooked up to the steering column
the power steering modified to work with the rack and pinion and a few
other minor foibles but I think when said and done it ain't agonna be
much better than what is in there already. 
 
And that seems pretty heavy to me.
John
 
 
 
 
 
 


------------------------------

Message: 8
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 06:48:43 -0400
From: AMC74Hornet@xxxxxxxxx (Mr. AMC)
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] Mustang II suspension?
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <17172-44F1788B-1131@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII

I agree with you John. Since I am no longer physically able to do my own
front ends I had to have the one done in my orange 74 Hornet. I supplied
the parts that I got for mechanic cost and no tax and with the labor and
no tax the total for everything came to just under a 1000$ but that was
also with new front rotors, calipers, pads, rubber brake hoses, wheel
bearings, upper and lower control arm bushing's and strut bar bushing's
and wheel seals, shocks and a front wheel alignment. Personally the
stock suspension handles just fine for me with gas shocks and an after
market front V8 wagon sway bar. I also don't like the feel of rack &
pinion steering, give me the old Saginaw. 
"Doc"



------------------------------

_______________________________________________
AMC-List mailing list
AMC-List@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.amc-list.com/mailman/listinfo/amc-list


End of AMC-List Digest, Vol 7, Issue 50
***************************************