AMC-List Digest, Vol 11, Issue 44

[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. Re: overweight Americans (Swygert, Francis G MSgt 436 CES/CECM)
   2. AMC 401 (Rick Hartman)
   3. Re: overweight Americans (Mark Price)
   4. Charity AMX (Don Johnson)
   5. Re: My Son's AMX made car craft. (Tom Jennings)
   6. Re: overweight Americans (Tom Jennings)
   7. (no subject) (John Elle)
   8. Fw: looking for gremlin window seals (Eddie Stakes)
   9. French Headlights (nolanatcamelot@xxxxxxx)
  10. Re: What's it from/for Metropolitin swap???!!! (Ken Ames)
  11. E-stick (Tom Jennings)
  12. offline almost a week! (Jim Blair)
  13. Overdrives revisited. (John Elle)


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

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 07:10:16 -0600
From: "Swygert, Francis G MSgt 436 CES/CECM"
	<Francis.Swygert3@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] overweight Americans
To: <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID:
	<4CC05BF0CC3F114281434B00B733E2A316E0A9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"

As I recall my 61 American wagon weighed 2500-2600 pounds -- on a grain
scale. It was only ~200 lbs more than a friends 72 Pinto (this was back
in 79!). He couldn't believe it! Even I thought it would be more like a
500 lb. difference (he was thinking 800-1000). The weight difference was
mainly the heavy 196. With a newer engine it would have been closer. His
2.3L four speed would have been a good combo for it -- I've helped with
that swap in a 54 Nash Rambler -- ran great! Might have been a bit
lighter. 

Part of the weight growth is the change in unit body design. The "three
box" design is a bit heavier than the bumper to bumper rail design,
believe it or not. But manufacturing is quicker/easier (cheaper) for the
"three box" and the car can sit lower. Styling leads here, but the
difference is only about 200 lbs. in the body for a much more modern
looking car, and the better aerodynamics probably negates the slight
weight gain, at least on the highway. A 63 Classic isn't real
aerodynamic, but has less frontal area and is lower than a 62. The
heavier cars are a little more roomy too. Not so much difference in the
big cars (maybe none between 62 and 63 Classic, just different as the 62
sits higher), but there's a HUGE difference in interior space between a
63 and 64 American (63 being about the same as that 1950 Nash Rambler!).
Compare the weight between a 62 and 63 Classic to get a more realistic
figure on weight gain due to design differences. The 50-55 Nash Rambler
should only be compared to the 58-63 -- they are virtually the same car.
64-69 American to the Hornet is a more reasonable comparison also, since
the Hornet is a bit smaller than the 69. I think you'll find that they
are about the same weight though. Scaling down doesn't always produce a
lighter vehicle, just more cramped. 



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

Message: 2
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 07:27:29 -0600
From: "Rick Hartman" <ricnmatt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [AMC-List] AMC 401
To: <amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: <001001c72371$6ee115b0$2e01a8c0@rickar8buxy1hg>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="iso-8859-1"

Looking for a AMC 401....

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

Message: 3
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 6:25:57 -0800
From: Mark Price <markprice242@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] overweight Americans
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: "Swygert, Francis G MSgt 436 CES/CECM"
	<Francis.Swygert3@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: <25784135.1166538357196.JavaMail.root@web16>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

All this reading has me curious to try and get my 69 on a scale.
With it's 4.0L and T5, no A/C, I wonder what it weighs in at?
  It'll likely be heavier when it makes it as the interior is scheduled for carpet sound mat and some modern shoulder harnesses front and rear.
--
Mark Price
markprice242ATadelphia.net
Morgantown, WV


---- "Swygert wrote: 
> As I recall my 61 American wagon weighed 2500-2600 pounds -- on a grain
> scale. It was only ~200 lbs more than a friends 72 Pinto (this was back
> in 79!). He couldn't believe it! Even I thought it would be more like a
> 500 lb. difference (he was thinking 800-1000). The weight difference was
> mainly the heavy 196. With a newer engine it would have been closer. His
> 2.3L four speed would have been a good combo for it -- I've helped with
> that swap in a 54 Nash Rambler -- ran great! Might have been a bit
> lighter. 
> 
> Part of the weight growth is the change in unit body design. The "three
> box" design is a bit heavier than the bumper to bumper rail design,
> believe it or not. But manufacturing is quicker/easier (cheaper) for the
> "three box" and the car can sit lower. Styling leads here, but the
> difference is only about 200 lbs. in the body for a much more modern
> looking car, and the better aerodynamics probably negates the slight
> weight gain, at least on the highway. A 63 Classic isn't real
> aerodynamic, but has less frontal area and is lower than a 62. The
> heavier cars are a little more roomy too. Not so much difference in the
> big cars (maybe none between 62 and 63 Classic, just different as the 62
> sits higher), but there's a HUGE difference in interior space between a
> 63 and 64 American (63 being about the same as that 1950 Nash Rambler!).
> Compare the weight between a 62 and 63 Classic to get a more realistic
> figure on weight gain due to design differences. The 50-55 Nash Rambler
> should only be compared to the 58-63 -- they are virtually the same car.
> 64-69 American to the Hornet is a more reasonable comparison also, since
> the Hornet is a bit smaller than the 69. I think you'll find that they
> are about the same weight though. Scaling down doesn't always produce a
> lighter vehicle, just more cramped. 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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, 19 Dec 2006 12:07:24 -0500
From: Don Johnson <donjohnson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [AMC-List] Charity AMX
To: AMC List <amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: <00a901c72390$272e5880$6400a8c0@DONS>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1

I'm not sure who asked the question regarding the wheel well area of the charity AMX and how things were supposed to fit, but since I am currently working on that part of my own car, I would be happy to supply pictures which might help out.
Don


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

Message: 5
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 09:34:28 -0800 (PST)
From: Tom Jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] My Son's AMX made car craft.
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0612190933280.5995@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Teamamc wrote:

> I sent in a few Pic's of My Son's first Smoke show with his 1980 AMX in
> June.
> Just showed up in Januarys Carcraft.

Cool! I'll go buy a copy. That must be fun for him, to see his
own car in there!



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

Message: 6
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 09:54:17 -0800 (PST)
From: Tom Jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] overweight Americans
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: "Swygert, Francis G MSgt 436 CES/CECM"
	<Francis.Swygert3@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0612190936440.5995@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

On Tue, 19 Dec 2006, Mark Price wrote:

> All this reading has me curious to try and get my 69 on a scale.
> With it's 4.0L and T5, no A/C, I wonder what it weighs in at?
>   It'll likely be heavier when it makes it as the interior is scheduled for carpet sound mat and some modern shoulder harnesses front and rear.

Probably pretty light! A/C with an all-Sanden setup is probably
under 150 lbs, but I bet a York setup is over 200 lbs, including
overhead. That old crap is heavy! And it's all in the nose of
the car.

I had all the insulation I installed in my Hornet in my arms;
it weighs close to nothing. The stick-on sound-deadening stuff
was probably 15 lbs. Carpet probably 20 lbs. Eh. That crap is all
worth it, I can tell you that! Hornets and Americans are noisy!


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

Message: 7
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 17:25:20 -0700
From: "John Elle" <johnelle@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [AMC-List] (no subject)
To: <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: <000201c723cd$58216580$20dd0d82@john1>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"

Well, being as this is Christmas, a time of well being and good cheer,
possibly a slightly of beaten thread would be acceptable on occasion now
that our parent company is no longer in Wisconsin but some where around
the Black Forest in the land of elves and trolls and also includes an
outfit that used to be known as Chrysler.
 I just received a Christmas card from a fellow Chrysler club member
harking back to the days when I was the news letter editor. I had
written a 2 part article a wee bit tongue in cheek at the time poking a
bit of fun (heresy) at the awesome reputation that the HEMI had
developed by reaching back into Chrysler History to it's early racing
days (really early racing days) when one of the first Chrysler 80's had
placed well at LeMans using the then new Flat Head I-6 engines. A bunch
of time later Lee Petty and his crew of merry men had done well in the
early days of stock car racing using 1950 Plymouths. Hardly a car that
one considered much of a power house but then again, what was in 1950? 
The article began by referring briefly to the racing history of Chrysler
Corporation dating back from pre-HEMI to the infamous if not legendary
UNDER HEAD CAM L-6 RED HEAD engine. After extolling on the benefits of
mounting the cam shaft closely to the valves to decrease complexity and
weight that the benefits of an Under Head Cam engine presents and the
improvement the higher compression (6:1) gave,  the rest of the two
articles chronicled the build up using vintage parts of a more modern
version of the same engine. (Used last in 1959 Chrysler cars and for
many years after in fork lift and other high tech industrial
applications.)  The reference was made to a number of sources for parts,
web sites that featured build up of these engines, other web sites that
chronicled adapters for current 5 speed transmissions and places to find
obsolete parts if one wanted to go with an over drive unit. 
It was shortly there after that one of the club members got ahold of me
and told me he was restoring a 1950 Plymouth that his dad sold new from
his Desoto Plymouth agency in Oklahoma and bought back not many years
ago from the estate with 10,000 miles on it. The car served as
transportation and got passed around the family and worn out so Cotton
and his wife Barbara decided to do the hot rod restoration route
complete with a built 360, torque flyte, AC and a number of modern
conveniences to travel around the S.W. with towing his trailer with his
restored Harley in it to car shows etc. His question was simply "is this
for real" and when assured that it was dropped all plans to modernize
the power plant and went the whole nine yards with a Dodge engine (218
cu in), over drive, dual carbs, aluminum head, dual exhaust headers and
a cam shaft. An over drive transmission was located rebuilt and
installed and a Vintage Air A/C unit installed as the car was restored
to factory "upgraded" original interior. 
His car was finished a year ago and since then has been driven to
multiple car shows through out Arizona and New Mexico and functions in
as he says, it keeps up with traffic. It is safe to drive and the A/C
keeps him wonderfully cool. He is now planning his 2007 adventures in
this wonderfully delightful modern day throw back.  A 1950 Plymouth
2dsd. 
There was a personal note included thanking me for the effort put into
the article and resources that he could use to accomplish this. You
know, this hobby can not get much better than that. 
So to all a Merry Christmas and a happy New Year to boot. 
If you listen carefully on a quarter moon night during the early hours
of the morning when the silence of the night prevails, you too might be
able to hear the crackle of an old flat head six walking and talking
through the gears echoing off the hills, off in the distance!
John
 
 


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

Message: 8
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 19:21:45 -0600
From: "Eddie Stakes" <eddiestakes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [AMC-List] Fw: looking for gremlin window seals
To: <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, <baadassgremlins@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: customgrapdesign@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <010801c723d5$b681baf0$abf1b148@piageedc1iqa5q>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
	reply-type=original

Anhyone that can help the folks out below give them a shout, thanks
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
----- Original Message ----- 
From: <customgrapdesign@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <eddiestakes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 9:45 AM
Subject: looking for gremlin window seals


> Hi Eddie,
>     I just spoke to you about the rear quarter window seals for my 77 
> Gremlin. If you know anyone who has a decent set for sale could you please 
> let me know. Thanks very much for your help.
> Rick Martines
> First Coast AMC Club (Florida)
> 386-985-5909
>
> 



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

Message: 9
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 20:51:43 -0500
From: nolanatcamelot@xxxxxxx
Subject: [AMC-List] French Headlights
To: AMCPacer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <8C8F1F088C1C79F-D28-B13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

This may be somewhat off the theme but my computerless brother is 
workiing on the granddaddy of AMC, a 49 Hudson coupe. He has now 
installed the Hemi and the wiring but wants to french the headlights 
and can't use the original headlight rims from the Hudson as they are 
pot metal. I;ve learned the some customizers have used the 52/53 Ford 
hieadlight rims, but so far he can't find any. Does anyone on this list 
jave a set of these rims ?  Or.....can you suggest an alternate rim ??

Nolan Dehner
Nor Cal AMCs
Windsor, CA
76 Pacer Standard
76 Pacer D/L
________________________________________________________________________
Check out the new AOL.  Most comprehensive set of free safety and 
security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from 
across the web, free AOL Mail and more.



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

Message: 10
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 22:40:37 -0700
From: Ken Ames <ameskg@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [AMC-List] What's it from/for Metropolitin swap???!!!
To: amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <1166593237.4588ccd5b3b16@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On the contrary, turbines are like steam engines, lots of torque and it starts
at zero rpm.
 http://www.motortrend.com/classic/features/c12_0603_1964_chrysler_turbine_car/specifications.html

Ken

Quoting farna@xxxxxxx:

> Tom, that would be APU (auxilliary power unit). They are used in aircraft
> (including larger helicopters) to provide starting power and ground power in
> remote locations or for short periods. I've seen a few. They produce hp at

> very high rpm as Andrew pointed out -- no useable torque, and a very narrow
                                            --------------
> power band. I think his electric idea has merit, but I think you'd still need
> a battery to control the power between the gen and motor -- or a very large
> variable resistance to dump excess power! On second thought, there should be
> an electrical way to vary generator output without varying engine speed
> much... multiple tap generator (I'm thinking something similar to a multi-tap
> transformer, like an old welder my brother has...)? Okay, I'm showing my
> limited knowledge of electrical stuff!! That's your area Tom!! 
> 





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

Message: 11
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 21:55:29 -0800 (PST)
From: Tom Jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx>
Subject: [AMC-List] E-stick
To: AMC List <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0612192147120.5995@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

I have a 62 American TSM that I've never looked at, ever
(I bought it for super cheap in a used bookstore Just
Because). Thogut I'd take a look at the E-Stick setup.

What a complication! I'm sure it works OK if you drive it right
and everything is like-new, but man it's complicated! There's
all sorts of little interlocking servos and switches to get it
to behave; low hot-oil pressure, hard accell, decell, wear, you
name it there's a spring, cam switch, lever and diaphragm for it.

It's got it's own bell housing, oil pump, some clutch parts,
cables, parts, pieces and it's own steering column. It would be
harder to retrofit than air conditioning or auto to manual trans,
in the treasure hunt of insignificant and obscure hard parts.

I sure would love to have one for a while though. You don't
get much more 1950's than that.

Maybe Twin-Stick, aluminum engine, E-stick, hell, throw in a
Studey Hill Holder. Now there's a combo for a lot of weekend tune
ups. I doubt the E-stick is compatible with overdrive though.

There's an excellent out-of-the-car factory photo of the
E-stick equipped engine/trans assembly in the 62 American TSM
frontispiece.  (How often do you get to use THAT word.)



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

Message: 12
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 22:38:28 -0800
From: "Jim Blair" <carnuck@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [AMC-List] offline almost a week!
To: mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <BAY114-F39B8028B5816DFB3077A47ACCF0@xxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

It's been rough since last thursday w/o power, heat and lights (I actually 
cured all that by friday noon with a trip to my cabin for emergency supplies 
as the rest were trapped in my stoarge w/o any access due to no power) but 
the worst has been lack of phone (even the cells were down) and internet 
along with no cable! (and I couldn't access the garage to work on my Jeeps 
due to downed powerlines and trees!)
   I have to pay another month's storage on my old place because I didn't 
have time to access it to clean it out on my days off (I was working on one 
rig I was going to haul to scrap when the lights went out and the wind 
whipped up) I left the garage in a hurry before the power went totally dead 
(I forgot my generator and 12vdc electric blanket but remembered my AC/DC 
inverter which ran TV and lights till power came back on) I also remembered 
my LPG tank but still can't find my chainsaw. (I think one of my sons nicked 
it back in summertime)
   I was able to help some friends who were stuck with no heat and lights 
too. (they are still out) Every gas can in our area along with generators 
and any source of heat/light disappeared faster than David Copperfield! I 
sdaw at least 1 gun drawn at a gas station when people were fist fighting 
(by someone trying to stop the fight fortunately) Seems the thin veneer of 
civility was stripped away this week by some people you would least suspect.
   I need to send this quick as I only have a bootlegged net access at the 
moment.

_________________________________________________________________
Find sales, coupons, and free shipping, all in one place!  MSN Shopping 
Sales & Deals 
http://shopping.msn.com/content/shp/?ctid=198,ptnrid=176,ptnrdata=200639



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

Message: 13
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 01:45:34 -0700
From: "John Elle" <johnelle@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [AMC-List] Overdrives revisited.
To: <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Message-ID: <000001c72413$3ac201c0$20dd0d82@john1>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"

Frank and possibly Dave Stohler
Dave had earlier purchased an overdrive transmission missing pieces.
This lead to problems in trying to use it as finding parts is a bit hard
to do. 
I just ran across the following web site and some other information too;
 
http://www.advanceadapters.com/acrobat/saturn.pdf
 
Apparently advance purchased parts and tooling to reproduce the Warn
over drive unit as the Saturn over drive unit. 
I am not familiar enough with either one to know if there is any parts
interchangeability but various web sites indicate Saturn parts can be
used on earlier Warn units. 
So the question is raised, any one know if parts can be purchased here
to fit Dave's over drive unit? 
If so, it is beginning to sound like a pretty good deal maybe
John.  


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

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


End of AMC-List Digest, Vol 11, Issue 44
****************************************