Re: [AMC-List] 258 6cyl swap into 63american convertible

["Swygert, Francis G MSgt 436 CES/CECM" <Francis.Swygert3@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I'm afraid Andrew is 100% on this one! This subject has gone around on
the list a time or two before, I think Andrew and I have it all worked
out! The ONLY options for a more modern and/or larger powerplant is the
Ford 200/250 six. The AMC later six is just to long -- it's about three
inches longer than the 196 -- just the block, not including the fan and
water pump. You can only squeeze about another inch out of the 58-63
American (and 50-55 Nash Rambler) engine compartment. I know of one 258
installed in a 61-63 -- it required removing the heater and setting the
engine back into the firewall. 

The 200 or 250 Ford will fit. They are both the same length, very close
to the length of the 196. The 250 is a tall deck 200 (1.7" taller deck,
0.78" longer stroke). You can find more info on these at
http://www.fordsix.com/. The only drawback is you're limited in he
carburetion department. They have the intake cast into the head, but no
removable plate like the 196. This isn't a big problem -- the 200 has
about the same power as the 196 stock (1969: 120hp @ 4400, 190# @ 2400),
the 250 a good bit more (1969: 155hp @ 4000, 240# @ 1600). The 250 is
actually a good choice, and was used into the mid 80s. The SBF trans
pattern is used, but you can't use an SBF flexplate or flywheel due to
balance (balanced to the V-8, like AMC V-8s). You can, however, use a
Ford 300 six flexplate/flywheel (I think the 300 also uses the SBF trans
pattern -- the 300 is to long for the engine bay as well, so don't get
that idea!). You can use a 300 trans setup and get a five speed. 

You will simply have to alter the engine bay to fit any V-8 or 90 degree
V-6. Pick up a current issue of Hot Rod. There's a 61  American wagon
with a SBC in it that looks near stock under the engine bay. Well,
that's because the guy hand formed new inner fender panels to look stock
but still fit the engine! 

You CAN put a V-8 in with minimal cutting. The only thing that needs to
come out is the "humps" just above the upper A arm mounting points. The
humps are left-overs from the 1950-53(?) front suspension design. A rod
used to go up to the apex (where there should be a small hole) and
extend down to the upper shock mount for support. The upper shock mount
was redesigned around 54 and the rod eliminated, but the stamping was
never changed. 

I've assisted with this, but didn't see the finished project -- don't
know how the exhaust ended up. With an SBC it's hard to get to the plugs
-- the engine will need to be jacked up or access holes cut into the
inner fender panels at just the right location. Then you take the tires
off and use a long extension. This can be done and look neat. I saw one
with 2-1/2" plastic plugs along the side for sparker access. One
solution to the exhaust is to mount the manifolds backwards (swap left
to right) and curve the pipes back from the front. I saw one in a
magazine (a 1950's "Speed Mechanics" -- might have been the first V-8
small Rambler ever!) that did this. 

Forget headers, unless you use "over the rail" types for an early Nova
and cut holes in the inner fender panels near the firewall for them to
exit. There was a 61-63 drag car built over the last couple years that
uses that method (I have photos -- used in an AIM article). Block
huggers MIGHT work, but I think the center exit will interfere with the
steering box or shaft on the left side. 

Another possibility is the 60 degree V-6s, Ford or Chevy (I think all
the Chrysler V-6s are 90 degree?). The only problem is you'd have to use
hot rod style accessory brackets. I looked at a Ford 2.9L in a Bronco II
as a candidate once, and a 2.8L in an S-10. Both mount the accessories
way off to the side of the engine, making it a wide installation. This
can be corrected, but may take some custom brackets. I think there are
aftermarket brackets for the GMs though. 

I looked into four cylinders. The only one narrow enough to fit without
major engine bay mods is an early 2.3L Ford. Later ones, and all other
modern fours I could find (around 1994-95, when I was seriously
considering repowering my 63 American), had intakes that stuck out to
far to the left. It is still possible to use one, like the Jeep 2.5L
from a Wrangler or Cherokee, but the left hump will need to come off. At
least there's clearance on the right side though. 

How it looks depends on how you finish off the inner fender panels after
the hump is cut off. A flat piece of sheet metal is usually welded in.
Grind the welds smooth and paint and it could look neat if not near
stock. Put a vertical ridge or bead in it through the center and it will
look stock. That's what the guy in the current hot rod magazine did, and
I can assure you it looks stock enough I did a double-take -- I know the
V-8 won't fit without removing those humps! Had to read to see what he
did. It's very admirable work, even if it does have a Chevy engine! The
only thing that would make it better is if it had a 250 or 290 AMC
V-8... though I'm sure most would go larger. I only mention the 250
because it was made at the time (last year was 61), and could have
been...

------------------
Date: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 03:32 PM
From: andrew hay <adh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

" From: "M Walter" <redamc1963@xxxxxxxxxxx>
"
" Hello AMC people!   Here I am again asking advise on yet another idea
on a
" powertrain swap for my beloved little red 'vert.  The thought of
cutting up
" the engine bay on this car to put in a 290  really makes me cringe.
" Especially after seeing a couple examples on ebay.  So my thoghts are
now
" leaning toward a 258 or a 232, because it has to be an AMC.  I have so
far
" kept the car period correct, but not totally origional.  The car is
just to
" nice to be sporting the 196 ohv.  There is no aftermarket for it and
not
" much potential.  I already have a T14 to hook it up to.  Also is there
any
" difference in bell pattern up to '85or '86?    THANK YOU  once again,

there is a major shift in bell pattern '71-2.  '64-'71 199/232/258 have
the same small pattern as the 196; '72-up 232/258/4.0 have the larger
290-later v8 pattern.

the later six is quite a lot longer than your 196; it could take just
as much cutting though of a different sort to fit as a v8 would take.

a non-amc possibility would be a ford 200.  iirc they used the t96 up
to '65 or so, so with the right bellhousing it'd bolt up to your t14.
[phase 2: there are also sr4/t4/t5 pattern bells for the 170/200]
there are a number of speed parts for it but imho the best is the
australian/argentinian 12-port head and 2bbl intake.  someone's
bringing them into this country...

late 200s, like the 250, have the ford small-v8 pattern.  there is no
t96-pattern bells for these.


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

or go to http://www.amc-list.com