Re: [Amc-list] Pearly Whites

[adh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Sandwich Maker)]

" From: JOE FULTON <piper_pa20@xxxxxxxxxxx>
" 
" 
" --- Sandwich Maker <adh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
" > yeah, me either.  the concept of a six for
" > smoothness makes sense, but
" > they picked a lousy engine that was hardly more
" > powerful than their
" > own very good four.  the 3.4 crate motor [160hp] is
" > more like what they
" > should've been aiming at.
" 
" I'm not sure the 3.4 was available when the 2.8 was
" selected for the Jeep.  Anybody know for sure? 

no it wasn't, not until after the ~'87 redesign.

" Anyway, I put 150,000 miles on a 2.8L S-10 Blazer in
" the late 80s.  It was not a bad motor.

late '80s would put that in the redesign years also.  all jeep 2.8s
were first design, and that was the problem child.
________________________________________________________________________
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