Re: [Amc-list] Re; newer Strut Rod Bushings and more

[JOE FULTON <piper_pa20@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

All,

The 1967 through 1972 AMC parts book shows two types
of strut rod bushings for all AMC car bodies:

Type 1    one piece bushing

steering side: nut, concave washer, bushing, support
plate, convex washer, nut, jam nut

Type 2

steering side:  nut, convex washer, bushing with metal
liner, support plate, bushing concave washer, nut, jam
nut.

Concave and convex are referenced on the steering arm
side of the bushings.

Joe Fulton
Salinas, CA
--- John Elle <johnelle@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Well, Tom
> Working from my own experiences I have rebuilt about
> 2 dozen front ends
> of 1970 + AMC cars over the last 20 years and simply
> can not remember
> what type of variations I have seen other than
> basically the one piece
> unit which is squashed into place and the 2 piece
> unit that consists of
> two rubber piece and a metal 
> sleeve internally both of which are pictured in the
> 2 of the 3  TSM's
> that I have. It is also not unusual for the
> aftermarket to come up with
> a reverse engineered piece whether it is actually
> better or not and as I
> have made my living out of aftermarket for half my
> working career I can
> honestly say more often than not aftermarket does 
> not produce a better piece, just one that sort of
> works a lot of time. 
> 'Specially since this part is common to at least two
> other makes of cars
> both of which are more popular and possibly used
> them differently than
> AMC did. Money is very rarely spent to improve low
> volume applications;
> they generally have to make do with what is
> available. Since AMC has
> been out of business since 1987 I can safely assume
> that there was not
> much money spent to improve parts that were ear
> marked for AMC
> applications. 
> For example I have not had an aftermarket ball joint
> dust cover last
> past a year which is why I personally started using
> aftermarket
> polyurethane dust covers for ball joints and have
> not had one fail yet. 
> The point I am trying to get across is before I
> start blaming the rubber
> part as not being correct I would like to find out
> if various other
> manuals cover the applications of the strut rod
> bushing and if they do,
> what is it that they say. 
> I have 3 manuals a 1970, a 1974 and a 1980. Two of
> those three manuals I
> have the supplement for. With the exception of the
> one piece strut rod
> bushing there is no common agreement as to what
> order the parts should
> be assembled in between those three manuals. 
> I would be curious to know from others, if they have
> different manuals
> what it is that they exactly say. 
> I know how I interpreted the information that I have
> and it is very
> possible that I have interpreted in wrong. Despite
> the fact that I have
> 3 cars in the driveway still that I have rebuilt the
> front suspension
> on. Plus the two that I have parts for and even they
> do not match except
> for one thing. They are both 2 piece rubber units
> with the 
> pregnant washers installed opposite from each other.
> 
> That of course proves nothing. 
> Nor has the instructions that have come with the
> parts that I have
> purchased over the years enlightened the situation
> any. 
> Other than one of my cars I rebuilt in the early
> 80's, one in 1999 and
> have put 30,000 miles on it and one that I rebuilt a
> few years back and
> really does not have much in the way of mileage on
> it non of those three
> cars are in dire straights. 
> But from those that I have disassembled in wrecking
> yards to get core
> parts for they have been by in large junk and were a
> danger on the road
> if driven in the manner that I found them in. The 74
> Hornet I drove into
> the drive way rattled from so much metal to metal
> contact with the
> control arm and strut rod bushings.
> The last late model AMC car I owned was a 77 Matador
> coupe that was
> about 4 years old at the time of purchase with about
> 55,000 miles on it.
> I drove it another 30,000 or so before the control
> arm bushing went
> metal to metal and the strut rod bushings were still
> functional so I can
> not even comment what they looked like. 
> In fact until they were about 20 years old or so,
> they did not really
> need too much in the way of front end work but that
> time has since
> passed. 
> My personal interest in this has become greater in
> the last 10 years or
> so as I saw more and more damage to the AMC 70+
> front suspension. The
> lower control arm is a scary poor design as is the
> geometry it works
> with. But it does work the way it was designed to
> work. It must flex to
> be functional and flex it does. I have now learned
> how to weld the
> things up and restore them back to functional
> operation, I have had too,
> they flex and break with neglect and abuse. Any
> attempt to take some of
> the flex out of the bushing area where only one side
> of the bushing is
> press fitted into the control arm will cause binding
> and excessive
> damage to that area with any mileage put into it and
> they will break
> sooner and more catastrophically. 
> The manuals will not address the nuances if any of
> an aftermarket design
> but they will attempt to address what AMC wanted
> done to them in the
> first place.
> It sure might be nice to come up with some form of a
> common agreement as
> to what that intent was, which is the basis for my
> request for
> information. 
> One accomplished, if it can be, than maybe
> aftermarket applications can
> too be addressed. 
> Food for thought 
> John. 
>  
>  
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
>
http://www.amc-list.com/pipermail/amc-list/attachments/20070702/5754871b/attachment.htm
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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