AMC-List Digest, Vol 10, Issue 56
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
AMC-List Digest, Vol 10, Issue 56
- From: amc-list-request@xxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 15:56:08 +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: Blasphemy (dornbos@xxxxxxxxxxx)
2. Re: 360 Rebuild (Todd Tomason)
3. Re: SJ Axle width? (Swygert, Francis G MSgt 436 CES/CECM)
4. Copyright/copyleft/GNU license? (pertaining to AMC info
files) (Swygert, Francis G MSgt 436 CES/CECM)
5. Re: AMC Progress -- Motorcraft vacuum advance
(Swygert, Francis G MSgt 436 CES/CECM)
6. Re: 360 Rebuild (Swygert, Francis G MSgt 436 CES/CECM)
7. Re: bad bearing... somewhere...
(Swygert, Francis G MSgt 436 CES/CECM)
8. Re: bad bearing... somewhere...
(Swygert, Francis G MSgt 436 CES/CECM)
9. Re: Blasphemy (Mark Price)
10. Re: Blasphemy (Sandwich Maker)
11. Re: AMC Progress (Mark Price)
12. Re: Continuing Saga of Doc the Jeep, Part II.5 (Sandwich Maker)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 4:27:32 -0800
From: <dornbos@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] Blasphemy
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: amc-list-request@xxxxxxx
Message-ID: <1281178553.1164716852088.JavaMail.root@fepweb08>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Hi gang
What this really comes down to is wether or not we should have some say in what each other does with their own vehicle.
I really don't know why I'd care what brand of motor anyone else puts in their car. Personally I do like looking at all-AMC cars but that's only a personal preference and isn't even close to me saying anything like "they should've kept it original."
I've even seen people who have sold their vehicle and then got angry because of what the buyer did with it after he bought it. How strange! Unless the seller wants to give the buyer some say in how he spends the money the buyer gives him, then he should expect no say in what the buyer does with the car after he buys it. It's a sales agreement, not a partnership agreement.
There used to be a Corvette here in Michigan that was covered in camouflaged adhesive vinyl. The owner did a really nice job of it but quickly found out that it antagonized a lot of fellow Corvette owners. This is America folks! Unless you believe the same way as the Muslim extremists who bombed NYC a few years ago, we are a pluralistic society which believes in INDIVIDUAL freedom. What I really hope (as an American) is that everyone does whatever blasphemous thing they want to with their cars. That's being American. Unfortunately, what this guy experienced with his Corvette is some kind of underlying feeling amongst many Corvette owners who see all Corvette owners as partners in a cause to uphold the public image of the Corvette and this guy violated their narrow view.
I feel the same way about the AMC hobby some times ... that there's an underlying feeling amongst many AMCers who see all AMCers as partners in a cause to preserve these cars so they can survive for some future generation who might want them. I feel no need to preserve much of anything that isn't mine. In fact, I think my AMC will fade away in my lifetime, in other words, that I'll use it up. I don't really care that there will be one less AMC (or pure AMC) for the world. (If someone really doesn't want to see that happen, my 1973 Matador is for sale for $2500 with the motor broke.)
When the AMCs are "gone" as they surely will be, then if I'm still alive and want another hobby vehicle, I'll buy whatever is cheap at that time, probably a GM with that Vortech inline-6. I just think it's strange that along the way, any car hobbyist in America would have to put up with crap from other hobbyists about his choices.
Doug Dornbos
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 06:54:36 -0600
From: Todd Tomason <jayscore@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] 360 Rebuild
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <200611280654.36526.jayscore@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Matt,
I should have included the cylinders. #3 was 35, and #8 was 0. Opposite
sides of the motor. My thinking is that the cylinders that are reading 90
are normal for an old, tired motor. The one that reads 35 probably has a bad
ring. The one with zero probably had something actually break the other day.
Todd
On Monday 27 November 2006 22:25, Matt Haas wrote:
> Todd,
>
> I don't think you'll be able to check compression turning the engine by
> hand. You really need to use the starter motor to turn it over.
>
> On the 360, if the two low cylinders are next to each other, it could be
> a blown head gasket but 90 PSI sounds low to me. There are plenty of
> other problems that you could have but the only way to know for sure is
> to tear the engine down. Since the problem happened all of a sudden, it
> will probably be easy to spot the problem.
>
> Matt
>
> Todd Tomason wrote:
> > My son and I get to rebuild our first engine. The 360 in his Matador is
> > having major problems. Driving home the other day he had a dramatic loss
> > of power and starting leaking and burning a lot of oil. He had to add
> > several quarts of oil to get home. The motor now has a lot of blow-by.
> > It popped off the oil fill cap several times.
> >
> > We did a compression test yesterday. Most of the cylinders are about 90
> > lbs. One was 35, and one was 0. Anyone have suggestions on a plan of
> > attack? I'm thinking of pulling the motor, and pulling the head on the
> > side with the dead cylinder. I'm thinking I should be able to tell if
> > it's the valves or the piston. Is there a better way to do this?
> >
> > We picked up a 304 from a wrecked Javelin that we plan to put in
> > temporarily. This is from a car that we know was running before it was
> > wrecked. Is there anything we should check before we install the motor?
> > I've been thinking that we could run a crude compression by turning the
> > motor by hand. This should alert us to any major problems.
> >
> > Todd
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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: 3
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 07:14:56 -0600
From: "Swygert, Francis G MSgt 436 CES/CECM"
<Francis.Swygert3@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] SJ Axle width?
To: <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID:
<092D8CF6635129428E9B66DC582C3B3D01B3693E@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
The Explorer 8.8" has been successfully used in Javelins and, is closer
to the right width for big cars. Even 1/2" narrower would have helped
when I ran an XJ axle w/3-3/4" backset 7" wheels! It's tough to find a
7" wheel with a deeper backset than that. You need something with more
like 4-1/4" backset to use the XJ axle, 3-3/4" (w/7" wheel) would work
much better with the Explorer axle. The only thing I could find with
enough backset for my stock width Jaguar XJ6 axle (88, but all Jag
XJ6/12/S axles are the same width) was a Weld Drag Lite. They come in
just about any backset you can think of in 1/2" increments. I ended up
running 7" wheels with a 5.5" backset. I run the same on the front, but
have the spindles spaced out from the steering knuckle about 3/4" (+3/8"
from the disc brake caliper bracket -- just over an inch). Even then I
needed 1/8" spacers to keep the wheels from scrubbing the a-arms.
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 07:39:24 -0600
From: "Swygert, Francis G MSgt 436 CES/CECM"
<Francis.Swygert3@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [AMC-List] Copyright/copyleft/GNU license? (pertaining to AMC
info files)
To: <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID:
<092D8CF6635129428E9B66DC582C3B3D01B36976@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
" I can look around for an appropriate copyright boilerplate if
" you like, one that would acknowledge you as the compiler, allow
" community sharing and updating, and prevent commercial parasites.
"something like the gnu copyleft? that might be too restrictive, but
it's the right general direction."
----------------------
As noted, you can't copyright public information, what you're
copyrighting is the exact format. If someone gets some of the info from
your source that's fine, as long as they reformat it there's nothing you
can do. If ALL they do is reformat, you could claim copyright
infringement. You'd most likely win unless they can come up with another
source that didn't originate from your info.
I generally put a statement similar to the statement below at the top of
my articles for the internet. Of course I've changed it over the years
-- some statements aren't as elaborate (some have no mention of AIM, and
use my name instead of FARNA Systems). This particular one was meant
for serial/VIN code and engine code information. I didn't want anyone
changing the info without letting me know because there is some
confusing data that I had to sort through to figure it all out, and I'm
relatively certain it's 99% correct. One data point of confusion is that
the engine code letter for the VIN and Engine Day Build Code isn't
always the same, but people generally think they are because a few
actually match -- but most don't.
"NOTE: The following article is copyright 2001 by FARNA Systems,
publisher of "American Independent Magazine" (AIM), which covers AMC and
related vehicles. For more information about AIM see the website linked
at the end of this article. Permission has been granted this site to
display this document intact (including this statement) with no
alterations unless approved by FARNA Systems. If anyone suspects an
error please do not make corrections, contact farna@xxxxxxxx"
Sometimes I just use this simpler statement (or something similar), or
add the last line to the above so others may copy and post the file:
" This article copyright Frank Swygert, 2006. It may be freely copied
and posted as long as it is kept intact and no charge is made for the
information."
And sometimes add: "..., and the copyright holder is notified." --- just
so I'll know where the file is being used. I started putting the notice
on when I found a few copies of articles I wrote for the 'net on sites
that didn't give me credit as the source. I generally don't mind copying
something I posted somewhere as long as it's on a free site, but I do
want credit for my work. I just let the posters know it was mine and
asked that they put my credit info up or remove the file -- all put the
credit on. Most stated they received the file from someone who didn't
include the source, and never doubted that. Anyone can copy and paste!
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 07:41:54 -0600
From: "Swygert, Francis G MSgt 436 CES/CECM"
<Francis.Swygert3@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] AMC Progress -- Motorcraft vacuum advance
To: <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID:
<092D8CF6635129428E9B66DC582C3B3D01B36980@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Monday, November 27, 2006 09:53 PM
From: Todd Tomason <jayscore@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
But if you buy a later rebuilt distributor it comes with a new vacuum
advance.
Why can the rebuilders buy a Motorcraft vacuum advance, but we can't?
On Monday 27 November 2006 09:16, Jim Blair wrote:
> A: What gets me is that the Prestolite vacuum advance is available,
but the
> later Motorcraft one isn't! (At NAPA that is)
--------------------------------------------------------
All this means is that NAPA doesn't have a regular supplier that carries
the Motorcraft part, or they don't sell enough to list it in their
catalog. It doesn't mean it's not available from some other source.
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 08:21:23 -0600
From: "Swygert, Francis G MSgt 436 CES/CECM"
<Francis.Swygert3@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] 360 Rebuild
To: <jayscore@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID:
<092D8CF6635129428E9B66DC582C3B3D01B68BD8@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Jay, since this happened suddenly, I think you'll find a holed or
cracked piston in the cylinder with no compression. It could have
dropped a valve too. The 35# cylinder may have a burnt or stuck open
valve. Was he running this thing hard when it happened? Might not have
been -- a valve keeper could have just given up, or some other condition
(like plain old metal fatigue, or a factory flaw finally showing up)
caused the problem.
You definitely need to pull the head on the side with the dead cylinder.
Check the valves when the cover is off (make sure both are there), but
don't turn it over again. Pull the head and check the piston first.
Could be cracked and scratching the cylinder wall. I know you've spun it
some already, but one more time could scratch that much deeper. Even if
the wall is scratched deep you can have that cylinder sleeved and bored
to match the rest. Sleeving costs about $50 a hole now. If more than
three cylinders need sleeving I'd look for another block. I generally go
with more than two on a six, but that's just my opinion. If it's a hard
to find block (like a 401) you might want to sleeve all eight. Would
depend on the price of a replacement block. I do know a few people who
have had all cylinders in a 390 or 401 sleeved. 360s can generally be
found easy enough that more than two or three sleeves aren't practical.
You just have to figure what your time to retrieve and disassemble the
"new" engine is worth, and the wait if you can't get one immediately.
How long can you be without the car? The good 304 may have nearly as
much power as the tired 360, but if you're going to rebuild the 360 and
can wait 2-4 weeks there's no point in pulling the engine twice.
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 08:37:59 -0600
From: "Swygert, Francis G MSgt 436 CES/CECM"
<Francis.Swygert3@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] bad bearing... somewhere...
To: <das24rules@xxxxxxxxx>, <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID:
<092D8CF6635129428E9B66DC582C3B3D01B68C08@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Yes, there's a carrier bearing in the middle of the torque tube. You
have to take the torque tube out. That means pulling the rear axle
first. That's easy enough -- disconnect tube from tranny, disconnect
shocks, track bar, and brake lines, then jack up the rear end until the
springs can be pulled. Then slide the rear end back until the driveshaft
yoke pulls out of the trans in front. I always jack the car up by the
axle with a floor jack then put jack stands under the body just in front
of the rear wheels. Take the shocks and all loose with the jack still
under the axle, then pull the wheels (leave the wheels on while you're
under the car just in case the jack fails, and lower it just enough to
put a little pressure on the jack stands before getting under there).
Pulling the wheels keeps you from having to jack the rear way up to pull
the axle back. Might take a good kick back from under the car to get the
u-joint yoke to break loose. It's a slip on fit, but hasn't moved in
years. Then simply unbolt the tube from the front of the rear axle and
slide it forward. There's a slip on joint at the axle too, but it hasn't
moved in years -- may take some prying.
Once the tube is out of the car the shaft should slide forward and out
of the tube. The bearing is held in place by snap rings and/or a
shoulder on the shaft -- it's been a while since I removed one. It's a
sealed bearing, and may be hard to find. Inland Empire may be able to
help (http://www.iedls.com/home.html). You'll need to measure the inside
diameter of the hole in the bearing and the outside diameter of the
rubber. Inland may then be able to find a polyurethane seated bearing
that will fit. It will be like there early model carrier bearings but
without the mounting bracket/housing. You may have to explain this to
them. Alternately, you might have to have someone who can work with
urethane (it can be shaped with a mill) make a carrier for a standard
sealed bearing with the correct size inside diameter. Even a piece of
wood will work as long as it snugly fits the bearing and holds it
centered in the tube. Longevity might be a problem, but I doubt it --
it's sealed in the tube. You could have a rare failed (or rather
failing) u-joint. If the car sat for a long time the grease in the joint
could have dried out and now the bearings in the caps are worn. Center
bearing and u-joint failures are both rare on six cylinder torque tubes,
but they do happen. Might start happening more often now due to the age
of the cars. Definitely check the u-joint first. Refer to your TSM for
more detailed removal info. Same chapter as the rear axle.
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 09:18:32 -0600
From: "Swygert, Francis G MSgt 436 CES/CECM"
<Francis.Swygert3@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] bad bearing... somewhere...
To: <tomj@xxxxxxx>, <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID:
<092D8CF6635129428E9B66DC582C3B3D01B68C55@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Only the 63-66 V-8 shaft has a double cardan CV joint (two standard
u-joints with a center piece with centering pin/spring joining them) at
the front. Earlier V-8s and all sixes use a single u-joint. 63-66 V-8
shafts are two piece with a solid rear half and tubular front -- I don't
remember if the 56-62 V-8 shafts are one or two piece. All six cylinder
shafts are solid one piece.
----------------
Date: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 12:45 AM
From: Tom Jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx>
On Mon, 27 Nov 2006, d stohler wrote:
> in the rear axle. now the rear is moving VERY smoothly, and
> quietly. the noise seems to be coming from the torque tube. maybe
> the middle of it. is there a bearing in there? im sure there is a
> u-joint right there on the back of the transmission right? being
It's a weird looking system... !
There's a CV joint (two U-joint X's) up at the trans end,
a sealed/un-lubeable bearing in the middle, and a splined
slip coupler in the rear. I think the center bears are still
available. They're under no real force (they keep the solid
portion of the driveshaft centered, is all), the one in my
Rambler is 350,000+ miles and still silent.
Check out the TSM; there's differences in the shaft, six
vs. eight.
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 7:26:59 -0800
From: Mark Price <markprice242@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] Blasphemy
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx, Jim Boone <fljab@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: <6426794.1164727619936.JavaMail.root@web26>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Another one of easy to find engineS I would consider in the dare to be different category would be the 4.7 Used in many late model Dodge products.
Good strong running motors you can pick up cheap. Plus overhead cams and you can even use the 287 fender badges :]
My DakotaQuad cab 4X4 knocks down a solid 18-19mpg and runs excellent. In a car body it would make a nice all around runner.
Not something I would ever do, but I'd like to see one done!
--
Mark Price
markprice242ATadelphia.net
Morgantown, WV
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 10:33:12 -0500 (EST)
From: adh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Sandwich Maker)
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] Blasphemy
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <200611281533.kASFXC520531@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
" From: Mark Price <markprice242@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
"
" Another one of easy to find engineS I would consider in the dare to be different category would be the 4.7 Used in many late model Dodge products.
" Good strong running motors you can pick up cheap. Plus overhead cams and you can even use the 287 fender badges :]
and it's first application was in jeeps! the wj grand cherokee iirc.
--
Andrew Hay +----------------------------------------------+
Internet Rambler | je suis Marxiste - tendent Groucho |
adh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx +----------------------------------------------+
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 7:33:56 -0800
From: Mark Price <markprice242@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] AMC Progress
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <24344360.1164728036931.JavaMail.root@web26>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
If we're talking six cylinders the Ford units work backwards from the AMC six.
Great for vacuum retard! Er, nevermind!
--
Mark Price
markprice242ATadelphia.net
Morgantown, WV
---- Tom Jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Nov 2006, Todd Tomason wrote:
>
> > But if you buy a later rebuilt distributor it comes with a new vacuum advance.
> > Why can the rebuilders buy a Motorcraft vacuum advance, but we can't?
> >
>
> Are the Duraspark V8 vacuum advance units the same for the
> six? If so, you could get an aftermarket adjustable unit,
> if not a stock Ferd part.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: 12
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 10:55:59 -0500 (EST)
From: adh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Sandwich Maker)
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] Continuing Saga of Doc the Jeep, Part II.5
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <200611281555.kASFtxn20683@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
" From: "Jim Blair" <carnuck@xxxxxxxxxxx>
"
"
" Here's a little something to put in your pipe: Altering the cam advanced
" also mods the power band (as in where it starts/stops in the RPM band) I
" used the 3 key set in my '66 Fairlane's 289 and couldn't get any top end
" RPM. It had brutal power to 1700 RPM then fell flat... It also pinged like a
" banshee! Retarded the cam and voilà! no more probs!
that rings bells... advancing the cam moves the power band lower,
retarding it moves it up - a common racing tuner's trick. but as a
side effect it would also affect cylinder pressure, and that's where
you could get your pinging! it works with the inertia of the intake
and exhaust streams; at high rpm when the gases are really moving,
leaving the valves open a little longer helps cylinder filling and
scavenging, but at low rpm the gases can blow backwards before the
valves close if the cam is retarded.
[side note: if the engine runs best with a lot of cam retard or
advance, it's a sign you need a different cam]
the '87-'90 jeep 4.0 efi has a knock sensor and egr. the '91-5 efi
has neither, but uses the same cam - retarded something like 8
degrees iirc, to reduce pinging and give it a sort of 'poor man's egr'.
btw this cam is pretty radical compared to older amc six cams. the
'76-80 2bbl and '81-'90 cams are in the upper 250s, 257 and 259 deg
iirc. my '66 cam is 244 and i have a book that lists that as stock
replacement for all '64-'79 except the late '70s 2bbl. when i went to
build a hot 232 up in the early '80s, the most radical hydraulic cam i
could find was 278 deg.
the '87-'98 4.0 cam is 280. in '99 they reduced exhaust duration to
the 260s.
________________________________________________________________________
Andrew Hay the genius nature
internet rambler is to see what all have seen
adh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and think what none thought
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
AMC-List mailing list
AMC-List@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.amc-list.com/mailman/listinfo/amc-list
End of AMC-List Digest, Vol 10, Issue 56
****************************************
Back to the Home of the AMC Gremlin