Re: [Amc-list] oops bent 'em again again

[Wrambler242@xxxxxxxxxxx]

Wasn't there another aluminum six floating around out that way? I know Joe has one that is siezed, but an aluminum six in that little American would just be beyond cool!!!
  I never really had any problem with the crashbox trans. The more you  drive it the easier it is to gain a feel for it.
I clanged mine into gear quite  few times and never seemed to hurt it. You just have to find the right "spot".

--
Mark Price
Morgantown, WV
1969 AMC Rambler, 4.0L, EFI, T-5

 -------------- Original message ----------------------
From: Tom Jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx>
> On Mon, 16 Apr 2007, Sandwich Maker wrote:
> 
> > i've wondered if a ford 200/250 would fit.  the 144/170/200 as late as
> > '66 or '67 were teamed with a tranny that looks a lot like [and i'm
> > pretty sure is] a t96 - little peanut 3sp, 4 bolt top cover...  it
> > must be longer than the 196, but maybe not -too-much- longer.  but
> > assuming you get this far, you couldn't use the australian/argentinian
> > 12-port head; the head would fit but the intakes are very wide.
> >
> > even if it fit, the 250 would require a tranny swap, because it has a
> > different bellhousing pattern than the 200 and was never teamed with
> > anything remotely like the t96.
> 
> Yeah, but this car is funny, to me. On a car like my Hornet,
> I had no hesitation upgrading anything I saw fit to. On this
> American, it would seem a crime.
> 
> It's not monetary or historical value, it's something else.
> I think, the Hornet is more or less a "modern" car, where the
> American is definitely an *old* car. The 63 Classic is somewhere
> in between.
> 
> They were designed for different worlds; the Hornet, for a world
> pretty close to this one. Lifestyle marketing, mechanism hidden
> away from the owner (the Hornet owners manual tells you how to
> turn the knobs, only; the 63 says how to adjust the carburetor!)
> The American (really a 50's car with 60's fenders) looks like
> a 40's car mechanically. There's simply no "stuff" between you
> and the running gear. The Hornet, much more padding, insulation,
> plastic and styling.
> 
> Cars like the American are like time machines; it's almost a
> different thing than a modern car, and I'd hate to ruin that
> with a revvy motor with a brainy automatic. I'll never put a
> stereo in it, I cleaned up the hybrid tube/transistor radio.
> 
> Driving it in traffic (for just that one day so far) requires all
> this intimacy with the thing, non-synchro first means you have
> to think about exit strategy at a busy 3-late traffic light,
> but when you're cruising on a long flat road you can mentally
> and audibly count all the parts between the spark plugs firing
> and the rear tires turning. Now THAT is driving.
> 
> The Hornet, click the key pull the shifter go, totally turn-key.
> In 15 minutes I'll drive 45 miles with the windows rolled up
> and the stereo ruining the rest of my hearing.
> 
> My classic, very 1963-modern (unlike the primitive American),
> it gets driven differently too, it's instant calmness, slow-ish
> but smooth, soft and springy, long-haul oriented comfortable. It
> runs absolutely perfectly all day long at 60mph, speedo needle
> straight up. I wouldn't wreck that either. (Though A/C sure is
> nice, I did agonize over the downside that it makes you drive
> through the desert with the windows rolled up, seriously. It
> totally changed road trips.)
> 
> We get to do all this with metal we scrounge together. To me
> it's what cars are all about.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Amc-list mailing list
> Amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.amc-list.com/mailman/listinfo/amc-list

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