AMC-List Digest, Vol 9, Issue 54
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
AMC-List Digest, Vol 9, Issue 54
- From: amc-list-request@xxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2006 00:23:35 +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. re EPA/DOT standards (farna@xxxxxxx)
2. Re: AMC-List Digest, Vol 9, Issue 51 AMBASSADORS (now trucks)
(farna@xxxxxxx)
3. Re: AMC-List Digest, Vol 9, Issue 51 AMBASSADORS (now trucks)
(Mark Price)
4. Re; AMBASSADORS (now trucks) (John Elle)
5. Voicing an Opinion (Brien Tourville)
6. Re: Voicing an Opinion (Mark Price)
7. Re: AMC Spirit questions (Tom Jennings)
8. Re: AMC-List Digest, Vol 9, Issue 51 AMBASSADORS (now trucks)
(Tom Jennings)
9. Re: Voicing an Opinion (Tom Jennings)
10. Re: 51 ambassadors & trucks (Eddie Stakes)
11. Film at 11:00 or Belly up to the trough!!! (Mark Price)
12. Re: AMC-List Digest, Vol 9, Issue 51 AMBASSADORS (now trucks)
(Mark Price)
13. Re: AMC Spirit questions (Mark Price)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2006 12:41:57 +0000
From: farna@xxxxxxx
Subject: [AMC-List] re EPA/DOT standards
To: mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx (AMC-List)
Message-ID:
<102120061241.1894.453A1595000C160A0000076621602813020E029D0E00@xxxxxxx>
http://www.cfact.org/site/print.asp?idarticle=233
That article is a bit skewed:
"So the facts are clear. Contrary to much of what you hear, SUVs are not the safety or environmental villains they are made out to be."
I'm not so sure...
"Light truck fuel efficiency has increased 55 percent since the 1970s. In fact, in many instances, today's light trucks and SUV's get better gas mileage than compact cars of the 1970s."
True, but there are also more being used just for crusing around in, and they don't get the mileage that smaller, lighter, same-year cars get.
"...the new car fleet average fuel economy has doubled from about 14 mpg to 28 mpg and light trucks have improved by 50 percent."
Note how they conveniently left out how much light trucks/big SUVs have imporved! I'd leave the smaller cross-over, more practical vehicles out of this argument -- it's the most truck-like that I think they are skewing/defending here. Average mpg for a large SUV/half-ton truck with six is in the low 20s on the highway, but that with sixes. At least half (probably more) are V-8s that get in the high teens and MIGHT hit 20 if driven carefully. So half-ton capacity vehicles have improved on average (across the board) from about 8 to 16 mpg. Proponents will use lighter capacity, smaller engined vehicles to dilute the figures, and they look good when you only use one of each model to get the average for a manufacturers line-up, but when looking at production numbers the V-8s will overshadow the sixes (no fours in half-tons!). Think Explorer or Trailbalzer and larger. Lots of sixes in that group, but they only get 22 mpg highway (rated -- actual is usually a little less for most d!
rivers)
. That might put the high for trucks/SUVs that size and larger (the majority) at 19 mpg? I think more like 18, but haven't crunched the numbers. I'm not "picking" on the larger vehicles -- the smaller, lighter ones are made more for passenger conveyances and to get better mileage though, much more practical for that purpose too.
"If safety is the highest priority for a driver, they should choose the vehicle type with the lowest overall fatality rate. According to The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), that vehicle type is the largest of the SUVs."
So let's all go out and buy Peterbilts. Let's not even consider that more damage to the other vehicle/property is doen by a larger vehicle. I'll be the first to say that if one of us has to go, I'd rather it be one of you rather than me (and I'm sure you guys feel the same way!), but driving a behemouth then charging over the roads like you own them is a bit on the selfish side! I've had big vehicles come over on me and switch lanes or pull out in front of me (much to close!) where the driver would have thought a bit more carefully in a smaller or more average size vehicle.
"So the facts are clear. Contrary to much of what you hear, SUVs are not the safety or environmental villains they are made out to be."
Clear as mud, now that the bottom of the pool's been all stirred in!!
Someone mentioned an exception for real work vehicles for EPA/DOT standards. That wouldn't work, not in simplest terms anyway. There would have to be a change in what consitutes a passenger vs. utility vehicle. That's what has manufacturers skewing the rules now, and is to easy to abuse. There isn't much difference in the efficiency and power of trucks and SUVs now -- hardly enough to notice that much. The safety standards are what's mostly pushed, and for the more luxurious those are being brought up now due to consumer concerns and competition. Some standards like bumper height are different, but can be designed around easy enough given a few years notice. In simplest terms it would be best to have a GVW standard and put it at the biggest SUVs. I don't think many will buy anything bigger than a Navigator!
--
Frank Swygert
Publisher, "American Motors Cars"
Magazine (AMC)
For all AMC enthusiasts
http://farna.home.att.net/AIM.html
(free download available!)
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2006 12:48:23 +0000
From: farna@xxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] AMC-List Digest, Vol 9, Issue 51 AMBASSADORS
(now trucks)
To: mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx (AMC-List)
Message-ID:
<102120061248.5112.453A1716000E3031000013F821602813020E029D0E00@xxxxxxx>
Joe, there are people like you that have a truck and aren't afraid to use it like one, but you're in maybe a 20-25% group. 75-80% just use it for transportation and occasioanlly pulling a trailer.
--
Frank Swygert
Publisher, "American Motors Cars"
Magazine (AMC)
For all AMC enthusiasts
http://farna.home.att.net/AIM.html
(free download available!)
-----original message------------------
Frank. Now what you said about new trucks is not
entirely true( no offence).NOT trying to argue but..
In 2004 i bought a brand new(first BRAND NEW
vehicle)2004 F150 4x4 FX4 off road supercab.Will never
buy a new vehicle again SINCE i got laid-off from the
good paying factory job i had back them. There are NO
good paying jobs available in Illinois for older (i'm
51)guys now!! ANYWAY.... I've hauled parts,engines
,rearends..etc from the first day i had it!!
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2006 7:09:47 -0700
From: Mark Price <markprice242@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] AMC-List Digest, Vol 9, Issue 51 AMBASSADORS
(now trucks)
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: farna@xxxxxxx
Message-ID: <24569154.1161439787973.JavaMail.root@web19>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
I use my truck for a truck when it needs to be used.
Using a truck to tow a trailer is not babying it!
Very few Of the people in my circle of friends and family don't use a truck for a truck!
Frank, Your numbers are reveresed in my experience.
New trucks for most people go thru that initial, "Oh, it's my baby" phase.
Then, all bets are off :]
I, for one, have come to realise I'm more likely to enjoy a truck more if I buy a used, but abused, one.
It's a lot easier and cheaper to use a truck when it already has a few war wounds.
I once spend months prepping out my everyday driver 84 Mustang GT. Did it up in White acrylic enamel with red accents, Walked into the shop the next morning and thought, "crap, all that work, now I have to wax it and keep it clean".
My drivers get a lot less attention now :]
It's easier to take care of the Rambler if I'm not burned out from washing and waxing the drivers!
--
Mark Price
markprice242ATadelphia.net
Morgantown, WV
---- farna@xxxxxxx wrote:
> Joe, there are people like you that have a truck and aren't afraid to use it like one, but you're in maybe a 20-25% group. 75-80% just use it for transportation and occasioanlly pulling a trailer.
>
> --
> Frank Swygert
> Publisher, "American Motors Cars"
> Magazine (AMC)
> For all AMC enthusiasts
> http://farna.home.att.net/AIM.html
> (free download available!)
>
> -----original message------------------
> Frank. Now what you said about new trucks is not
> entirely true( no offence).NOT trying to argue but..
> In 2004 i bought a brand new(first BRAND NEW
> vehicle)2004 F150 4x4 FX4 off road supercab.Will never
> buy a new vehicle again SINCE i got laid-off from the
> good paying factory job i had back them. There are NO
> good paying jobs available in Illinois for older (i'm
> 51)guys now!! ANYWAY.... I've hauled parts,engines
> ,rearends..etc from the first day i had it!!
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Sat, 21 Oct 2006 07:45:37 -0700
From: "John Elle" <johnelle@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [AMC-List] Re; AMBASSADORS (now trucks)
To: mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <000701c6f51f$96d34fa0$48de0d82@john1>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I'm with Frank on this, he is just more eloquent than I am.
SNIP
A Dodge Caravan minivan, for example, gets significantly better gas
mileage than a 1978 VW Beetle. A 2WD Chevy Blazer SUV gets the same gas
mileage as a 1995 Chevy Caprice - one of the last large station wagons
(20 mpg
SNIP
My Chrysler Town and Country, with a 3.8 V6 (232 cu in) advertised and
sold as a mini-van (Yuh!) a replacement for a station wagon (Possibly a
440 cu in Chrysler T&C or a 225 slant 6 Valiant), smogged as a light
truck (is that a FordF-350 with a camper on it?) but referred to in this
article as an SUV (Sport Utility Vehicle and just what the heck is one
of these figments of advertising imagination, just what is it that is
Sporty about a Van and with it's leather interior and full rugs on the
floor where is the utility? The same argument can be applied to a
Navigator) Is quite frankly also driven to the Junk Yards, carries
grungy auto parts (with a drop cloth over everything) and makes long
distant trips in the lap of Luxury (I side with Joe here) and is also
used to function as a delivery vehicle for S&S Express delivery gets
13.2 mpg on a delivery route (with the A/C on), 15.6 mpg on per call
pick up's and 24mpg on the open road w/ cruise and A/C and the CD player
playing. This is significantly better than my 1967 383 Chrysler that
averaged less than 12 mpg the whole time I owned it, but my 1991
Mitsubishi Expo LRV (a baby van that carried almost as much as my T&C
but pulling a trailer it would) averaged 29 mpg over 15 years and
270,000 miles and never went through a transmission or a clutch. The
reason for trading cars, I needed something that was bigger and the
miles were beginning to stress the Mitsu.
What have I learned since I traded off?
The jury is still out but-------it may take less miles to Stress a
Chrysler and my 390 5 speed Javelin can get better gas mileage but not
under all conditions.
John
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2006 12:11:47 -0400
From: "Brien Tourville" <hh7x@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [AMC-List] Voicing an Opinion
To: mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <453A0E83.18106.12CA32@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
From: Tom Jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] AMC-List Digest, Vol 9, Issue 51 AMBASSADORS
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Jgray_55@xxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0610202223290.2126@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006, Joe wrote:
> Hope i'm not in
> trouble noiw for voicing my opinion? Thanks,Joe
Oh yeah, you're in BIG trouble now! None of us here have
strong opinions!!!
=========================
I beg your Pardon ! Now Just What The Hell Does That Mean ?
;)
=Bt=
milnersXcoupe
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2006 10:22:13 -0700
From: Mark Price <markprice242@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] Voicing an Opinion
To: hh7x@xxxxxxxxxxx, amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <11288468.1161451333864.JavaMail.root@web30>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Yeah, I resemble;er;represent;er;uh something;that!
--
Mark Price
markprice242ATadelphia.net
Morgantown, WV
---- Brien Tourville <hh7x@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
> From: Tom Jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [AMC-List] AMC-List Digest, Vol 9, Issue 51 AMBASSADORS
> To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: Jgray_55@xxxxxxxxx
> Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0610202223290.2126@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
>
> On Fri, 20 Oct 2006, Joe wrote:
>
> > Hope i'm not in
> > trouble noiw for voicing my opinion? Thanks,Joe
>
> Oh yeah, you're in BIG trouble now! None of us here have
> strong opinions!!!
>
>
> =========================
>
>
>
> I beg your Pardon ! Now Just What The Hell Does That Mean ?
>
>
>
> ;)
>
> =Bt=
> milnersXcoupe
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Sat, 21 Oct 2006 13:28:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tom Jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] AMC Spirit questions
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0610211318030.2126@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006, John Elle wrote:
> SNIP
> and a Jeep Weber conversion, or a 2bbl-4bbl adapter
> and a Holley 390.
> SNIP
> This done on the stock engine can give an inexpensive boost for the buck
> 'specially when done with a cam. I prefer a Carter AVS or AFB my self
> between 350 and 400 cfm
John, all your comments are good. I have a question on yr carb
ideas above.
What Carter AFx carb is 350 - 400 cfm?
There doesn't seem to be many "performance" carbs (I use that
word loosely) in the under-500cfm range. The Holley 390 (but
Holleys seem to need constant fiddling for reliable treet use
(not their intended use)) and the Webers are about it; the BBDs
are fine too except for the limited adjustability.
But the smallest AFB I know of is 500cfm, and the AVS, isn't
that old, unavailable, and 600cfm-ish?
PS: Here's a small chart of rpm vs. engine CFM for 258 ci,
assuming 80% VE (I hope it's better than that!):
RPM CFM
1000 60
1500 90
2000 119
2500 149 <---
3000 179
3500 209
4000 239
4500 269
5000 299 <---
5500 328
6000 358
The two arrows are of course likely cruise RPM and max RPM
(stock small AMC, 70's). 2500 is perfect for the little YF,
which is sucked dry at speed. Dual YFs would be nice! :-)
A 500cfm carb on this motor would be unhappy unless you're at a
track at WOT most of the time, and even there it's a bit large.
The Holley 390 is at least sized right.
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2006 13:38:12 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tom Jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] AMC-List Digest, Vol 9, Issue 51 AMBASSADORS
(now trucks)
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0610211331050.2126@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006, Mark Price wrote:
> I use my truck for a truck when it needs to be used.
> Using a truck to tow a trailer is not babying it!
> Very few Of the people in my circle of friends and family don't use a truck for a truck!
Well, we're not exactly ordinary car drivers though!
> Frank, Your numbers are reveresed in my experience.
Come to Los Angeles -- the problem is MONSTROUS. I think between
the coasts, trucks are not treated radically differently than
they were 5, 10, 15 year ago, but in cities trucks are a scourge.
Something like 80% of U.S. population is in cities, don't forget.
I honestly believe 1/3 to 1/2 the cars beside me on my 45 mile
each way commute are half-ton trucks or SUVs. It's insane,
and the result of marketing alone. NONE of them ZERO even get
dirty. Shinier than my (cheaply painted) Hornet.
If I think of it, I'll take a photo of typical medium (not
worst-case) commute traffic. You never really see that (because
it's boring! :-) but it's shocking, the number of huge gas
guzzlers at 75mph.
> I once spend months prepping out my everyday driver 84 Mustang GT. Did it up in White acrylic enamel with red accents, Walked into the shop the next morning and thought, "crap, all that work, now I have to wax it and keep it clean".
> My drivers get a lot less attention now :]
I've discovered this same thing! My ratty-looking Rambler
is the MOST FUN CAR I've ever owned, ahnds down. I drive it
through brush down dirt roads. It gets washed and rinsed, but
the flat-sanded paint wouldn't take wax anyways. The hornet
likes wash'n'wax, and I'm doing that, but I don't think I'll
make a shiny car like this again (famous last words).
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2006 13:40:07 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tom Jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] Voicing an Opinion
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx, hh7x@xxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0610211339350.2126@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006, Brien Tourville wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Oct 2006, Joe wrote:
>
> > Hope i'm not in
> > trouble noiw for voicing my opinion? Thanks,Joe
>
> Oh yeah, you're in BIG trouble now! None of us here have
> strong opinions!!!
>
> I beg your Pardon ! Now Just What The Hell Does That Mean ?
>
> =Bt=
> milnersXcoupe
Them's fightin' werds!
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2006 17:24:32 -0500
From: "Eddie Stakes" <eddiestakes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] 51 ambassadors & trucks
To: <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: <01a001c6f55f$c4683620$e8f3b148@piageedc1iqa5q>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
On the trucks, some consider off roading jumping a curb or they install a
gravel driveway, wooo.....
On the 51 Nash, here is Lois Lane from the Superman series in the P. K.
Williams showroom on Congress street in Austin Texas, check out the sleds
across the street also:
http://www.planethoustonamx.com/press_photos/51_ramb_conv.JPG
this is the whole file should anyone want to buy photos in a shameless plug:
http://www.planethoustonamx.com/press_photos/amcpressphotos.htm
Ambassadors. These were AMC's top of the line vehicles. Great cars if you
have ever had the pleasure of owning one. I'm fond of the 67-73 type. This
is a 69 SST I have for sale, $975.
http://epage.com/js/mi/c0/1853577.html
Would make someone a good daily driver. Classic AMC color combination with
Ray Charles & Stevie Wonder working the Kenosha line...Pompeii Yellow
exterior and Green interior! Ironically enough I have owned about a dozen
AMC's in yellow & green. What is neat about this 69 is it cranks up smooth,
diles smootha nd you can go over speed bumps and road humps and just as
quiet as a new car. Really good suspensions on the Ambassadors. The other is
my 72 SST wagon,
http://epage.com/js/mi/n0/1392356.html
yup, filled with car seats, maybe a Sonic bag. I guarantee you of the 5.5
million vehicles or so in the Houston metro this is the only Ambassador
wagon that sees daily use. Gets a lot of attention also, people are
constantly asking who made it as there is only one tiny 'American Motors'
emblem on back. Most have either never heard of a Ambassador much less AMC.
The blue one strikingly resembles the only car my mom, who passed away in
1988 (and Oct 22 is here birthday; would have been 80) ever owned. It was a
blue 72 Ambassador Brougham wagon.
http://www.planethoustonamx.com/Photo_Gallery_AMX/images/dadadmireshisnew70rebel_jpg.jpg
not sure that link will stick, but it is in PHOTO GALLERIES on my site, then
press 'amx photo gallery' and it is fifth photo down, first row. That is one
of only two photos I have of it. And my dad, who died last year at 79 is
standing in front of it, and the 70 Chinese Embassy Rebel I bought from the
nest of spies here in Houston in early 90s, and gave this to him. I took off
the little commie flags on the front fenders however. That wagon of mom's
she only got to drive a few times, and that was back and forth up and down
Antelope street, maybe a couple of blocks. Hell I was a better driver at 9
years old in our Rambler wagon than she was, but she never leanred how to
drive.
Hopefully some of ya'll will discover how far ahead of their time the
Ambassador Series was...and still is. And many of the body styles are
timeless. Happy motoring
Eddie Stakes'
Planet Houston AMX
713.464.8825
eddiestakes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
www.planethoustonamx.com
Email is currently HEAVY
5-12 day reply times, call if important
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2006 17:10:10 -0700
From: Mark Price <markprice242@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [AMC-List] Film at 11:00 or Belly up to the trough!!!
To: AMC List <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "AMC-DelMarVA: yahoogroups.com" <AMC-DelMarVA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: <33448028.1161475810546.JavaMail.root@web32>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Follow the link to some trough pictures.
http://s94.photobucket.com/albums/l103/Wrambler_242/
User name is Wrambler_242 if the link is dead.
Mark Price
markprice242ATadelphia.net
Morgantown, WV
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2006 17:18:31 -0700
From: Mark Price <markprice242@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] AMC-List Digest, Vol 9, Issue 51 AMBASSADORS
(now trucks)
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <20113877.1161476311030.JavaMail.root@web32>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
This is the reason the Ambassador will likely never see a glossy paint job while in my ownership. I don't think I have it in me to bother doing another, The American is enough to fill that need.
I've come full circle on the convert it will mostly see a very low buck satin black paintjob and be called done by me. If it gets sold the new owner can take it from there. On that note, Anyone want it???? It still needs a nightmarish amount of work!
--
Mark Price
markprice242ATadelphia.net
Morgantown, WV
---- Tom Jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx> wrote:
SNIP
> > I once spent months prepping out my everyday driver 84 Mustang GT. Did it up in White acrylic enamel with red accents, Walked into the shop the next morning and thought, "crap, all that work, now I have to wax it and keep it clean".
> > My drivers get a lot less attention now :]
>
> I've discovered this same thing! My ratty-looking Rambler
> is the MOST FUN CAR I've ever owned, ahnds down. I drive it
> through brush down dirt roads. It gets washed and rinsed, but
> the flat-sanded paint wouldn't take wax anyways. The hornet
> likes wash'n'wax, and I'm doing that, but I don't think I'll
> make a shiny car like this again (famous last words).
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Sat, 21 Oct 2006 17:23:29 -0700
From: Mark Price <markprice242@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] AMC Spirit questions
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <4350674.1161476609064.JavaMail.root@web32>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Anyone ever get an "official" cfm reading on the Holleys off of 327's???
They sure appear to be very much 390 cfm carbs.
I've got two of these carbs + a couple of true 390 cfm holleys.
I should figure out which ones to keep and which ones to sell off.
None of them are in ready to run condition of course. That would be too easy!
--
Mark Price
markprice242ATadelphia.net
Morgantown, WV
---- Tom Jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Oct 2006, John Elle wrote:
>
> > SNIP
> > and a Jeep Weber conversion, or a 2bbl-4bbl adapter
> > and a Holley 390.
> > SNIP
> > This done on the stock engine can give an inexpensive boost for the buck
> > 'specially when done with a cam. I prefer a Carter AVS or AFB my self
> > between 350 and 400 cfm
>
> John, all your comments are good. I have a question on yr carb
> ideas above.
>
> What Carter AFx carb is 350 - 400 cfm?
>
> There doesn't seem to be many "performance" carbs (I use that
> word loosely) in the under-500cfm range. The Holley 390 (but
> Holleys seem to need constant fiddling for reliable treet use
> (not their intended use)) and the Webers are about it; the BBDs
> are fine too except for the limited adjustability.
>
> But the smallest AFB I know of is 500cfm, and the AVS, isn't
> that old, unavailable, and 600cfm-ish?
>
> PS: Here's a small chart of rpm vs. engine CFM for 258 ci,
> assuming 80% VE (I hope it's better than that!):
>
> RPM CFM
> 1000 60
> 1500 90
> 2000 119
> 2500 149 <---
> 3000 179
> 3500 209
> 4000 239
> 4500 269
> 5000 299 <---
> 5500 328
> 6000 358
>
> The two arrows are of course likely cruise RPM and max RPM
> (stock small AMC, 70's). 2500 is perfect for the little YF,
> which is sucked dry at speed. Dual YFs would be nice! :-)
>
> A 500cfm carb on this motor would be unhappy unless you're at a
> track at WOT most of the time, and even there it's a bit large.
> The Holley 390 is at least sized right.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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 9, Issue 54
***************************************
Back to the Home of the AMC Gremlin