Re: [Amc-list] 71 Gremlin 232 (AMC 15 axle vs AMC 20)

[Wrambler242@xxxxxxxxxxx]

Oh, I fogrot to mention that while added weight is added weight.
On an early American with a 4.0L and trunkmounted battery. That 75lbs is better served to be in the rear!
I'd like to get my hands on a set of circle track scales some day in see what the weight balance ends up being on my car!
   It definitly sat high in the front after the swap. I installed the lowering plates to get it back where it was before I pulled the 232 and BWauto.
    Think about the differences.
232 heavier then 4.0L
232 had cast iron intake and exhaust, 4.0L has aluminum intake and tube exhaust.
P/S pump, lighter on the 4.0L.
Aluminum waterpump on the 4.0L cast on the 232.
I doubt the T5 weighs anymore the the BW trans either!

--
Mark Price
Morgantown, WV
1969 AMC Rambler, 4.0L, EFI, T-5
2004 Grand Cherokee Laredo, 4.7L, Quadratrc II
" Chronic Pain Hurts"

 -------------- Original message ----------------------
From: Tom Jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx>
> On Sun, 24 Feb 2008, Jim Blair wrote:
> 
> > The 20 isn't that much extra weight (unless dealing with a 4 cyl) but the 8.8 
> and 9 inch have a friction penalty. It takes more HP to turn them. (D44 takes 
> more than an M20 too!)
> 
> I weighed them... it was a long time ago, but the big axle weighs
> 75 lbs more than the little axle. And that's UNSPRUNG weight,
> a terrible thing to increase in the butt of an alreday-light
> car...  unless all you plan on doing is driving in a straight
> line (some do :-)
> _______________________________________________
> Amc-list mailing list
> Amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://splatter.wps.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/amc-list

_______________________________________________
Amc-list mailing list
Amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://splatter.wps.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/amc-list